إعـــــــلان

**محمد سني 1989** · 13-06-2019, 01:30

الجزء الاول (سجود الملائكة لادم عليه الصلاة و السلام) .

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

قال تعالى : (( وَإِذْ قُلْنَا لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ اسْجُدُوا لِآدَمَ فَسَجَدُوا إِلَّا إِبْلِيسَ كَانَ مِنَ الْجِنِّ فَفَسَقَ عَنْ أَمْرِ رَبِّهِ ۗ أَفَتَتَّخِذُونَهُ وَذُرِّيَّتَهُ أَوْلِيَاءَ مِن دُونِي وَهُمْ لَكُمْ عَدُوٌّ ۚ بِئْسَ لِلظَّالِمِينَ بَدَلًا (50) ))

قال تعالى : (( وَإِذْ قُلْنَا لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ اسْجُدُوا لِآدَمَ فَسَجَدُوا إِلَّا إِبْلِيسَ أَبَىٰ وَاسْتَكْبَرَ وَكَانَ مِنَ الْكَافِرِينَ (34) ))

قال تعالى : (( إِذْ قَالَ رَبُّكَ لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ إِنِّي خَالِقٌ بَشَرًا مِّن طِينٍ (71) فَإِذَا سَوَّيْتُهُ وَنَفَخْتُ فِيهِ مِن رُّوحِي فَقَعُوا لَهُ سَاجِدِينَ (72) فَسَجَدَ الْمَلَائِكَةُ كُلُّهُمْ أَجْمَعُونَ (73) إِلَّا إِبْلِيسَ اسْتَكْبَرَ وَكَانَ مِنَ الْكَافِرِينَ (74) قَالَ يَا إِبْلِيسُ مَا مَنَعَكَ أَن تَسْجُدَ لِمَا خَلَقْتُ بِيَدَيَّ ۖ أَسْتَكْبَرْتَ أَمْ كُنتَ مِنَ الْعَالِينَ (75) قَالَ أَنَا خَيْرٌ مِّنْهُ ۖ خَلَقْتَنِي مِن نَّارٍ وَخَلَقْتَهُ مِن طِينٍ (76)))

قال تعالى : (( وَلَقَدْ خَلَقْنَاكُمْ ثُمَّ صَوَّرْنَاكُمْ ثُمَّ قُلْنَا لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ اسْجُدُوا لِآدَمَ فَسَجَدُوا إِلَّا إِبْلِيسَ لَمْ يَكُن مِّنَ السَّاجِدِينَ (11) قَالَ مَا مَنَعَكَ أَلَّا تَسْجُدَ إِذْ أَمَرْتُكَ ۖ قَالَ أَنَا خَيْرٌ مِّنْهُ خَلَقْتَنِي مِن نَّارٍ وَخَلَقْتَهُ مِن طِينٍ (12) قَالَ فَاهْبِطْ مِنْهَا فَمَا يَكُونُ لَكَ أَن تَتَكَبَّرَ فِيهَا فَاخْرُجْ إِنَّكَ مِنَ الصَّاغِرِينَ (13)))

قال تعالى : (( وَإِذْ قَالَ رَبُّكَ لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ إِنِّي خَالِقٌ بَشَرًا مِّن صَلْصَالٍ مِّنْ حَمَإٍ مَّسْنُونٍ (28) فَإِذَا سَوَّيْتُهُ وَنَفَخْتُ فِيهِ مِن رُّوحِي فَقَعُوا لَهُ سَاجِدِينَ (29) فَسَجَدَ الْمَلَائِكَةُ كُلُّهُمْ أَجْمَعُونَ (30) إِلَّا إِبْلِيسَ أَبَىٰ أَن يَكُونَ مَعَ السَّاجِدِينَ (31) قَالَ يَا إِبْلِيسُ مَا لَكَ أَلَّا تَكُونَ مَعَ السَّاجِدِينَ (32) قَالَ لَمْ أَكُن لِّأَسْجُدَ لِبَشَرٍ خَلَقْتَهُ مِن صَلْصَالٍ مِّنْ حَمَإٍ مَّسْنُونٍ (33) قَالَ فَاخْرُجْ مِنْهَا فَإِنَّكَ رَجِيمٌ (34) وَإِنَّ عَلَيْكَ اللَّعْنَةَ إِلَىٰ يَوْمِ الدِّينِ (35) ))

قال تعالى : ((وَإِذْ قُلْنَا لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ اسْجُدُوا لِآدَمَ فَسَجَدُوا إِلَّا إِبْلِيسَ أَبَىٰ (116) فَقُلْنَا يَا آدَمُ إِنَّ هَٰذَا عَدُوٌّ لَّكَ وَلِزَوْجِكَ فَلَا يُخْرِجَنَّكُمَا مِنَ الْجَنَّةِ فَتَشْقَىٰ (117))

كانت هذه قصة رفض ابليس عليه لعنة الله السجود لادم عليه الصلاة و السلام من القران الكريم ويدعي اعداء الاسلام اليوم من الملاحدة و المنصرين ان هذه القصة مقتبسة من كتب يهودية متاخرة و هي مجرد كتب تفسيرية تحتوي على الاساطير لا اقل و لا اكثر

و الحقيقة عكس ذلك اذ ان المتتبع للمصادر التي يدعون اقتباس القران منها لا تخلو ان تكون احد ثلاثة :

1. مصادر بعد الاسلام (بعد القرن السابع)

2. مصادر جمعت بشكل اولي قبل الاسلام بزمن بسيط و لكنها تعرضت لاضافات و تنقيحات كثيرة لقرون امتدت الى فترة ما بعد الاسلام

3. مصادر قبل الاسلام بقرون طويلة تمتد الى فترة ما قبل المسيح عليه الصلاة و السلام ويصل تراثها الشفهي الى زمان ابعد من ذلك

و المصادر التي يدعي هؤلاء الاقتباس منها هي :

1. المدراشات الثلاثة : مدراش فرقي العازر ، مدراش تكوين رباه و مدراش تنحوما .

2. سفر اخنوخ الثاني (المعروف بالترجمة السلافية لسفر اخنوخ)

3. كتاب Chronicles of Jerahmeel

4. الترجمة اللاتينية لكتاب حياة ادم و حواء

وسنرد باذن الله على كل نقطة على حدة

اولا : المدراشات الثلاثة

1. مدراش فرقي العازر

:

النص المدعى للاقتباس :

مدراش فرقي العازر الجزء 11:

Adam stood and he began to gaze upwards and downwards. He saw all the creatures which the Holy One, blessed be He, had created; and he was wondering in his heart, and he began to praise and glorify his Creator, saying, "O Lord, how manifold are thy works !" (Ps. 104:24). He stood on his feet and was adorned with the Divine Image. His height was from east to west, as it is said, "Thou hast beset me behind and before" (Ps. 139:5). "Behind" refers to the west, "before" refers to the east.

All the creatures saw him and became afraid of him, thinking that he was their Creator, and they came to prostrate || themselves before him.

https://www.sefaria.org/Pirkei_DeRabbi_Eliezer.11.9?lang=en

الرد :
شبهة الاقتباس مردودة لعلتين :

1. مدراش فرقي العازر تم تاليفه بعد الاسلام فقيل في القرن التاسع وقيل في الثامن فالاقتباس اذا مستحيل هنا لانه متاخر عن الاسلام

.

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية :
PIRḲE DE-RABBI ELI'EZER:

By: Joseph Jacobs, Schulim Ochser
Haggadicmidrashic work on Genesis, part of Exodus, and a few sentences of Numbers; ascribed to R. Eliezer b. Hyrcanus,

and composed in Italy shortly after 833

. It is quoted immediately before the end of the twelfth century under the following titles: Pirḳe Rabbi Eli'ezer ha-Gadol (Maimonides, "Moreh," ii., xxvi.); Pirḳe Rabbi Eli'ezer ben Hyrcanus ("Seder R. Amram," ed. Warsaw, 1865, p. 32a); Baraita de-Rabbi Eli'ezer("'Aruk," s.v. ; Rashi on Gen. xvii. 3; gloss to Rashi on Meg. 22b; David Ḳimḥi, "Shorashim," s.v. ); Haggadah de-Rabbi Eli'ezer ben Hyrcanus (R. Tam, in Tos. Ket. 99a).

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...rabbi-eli-ezer

بل على العكس فان هذا المدراش تاثر مؤلفه كثيرا بالاسلام و ليس العكس و حتى في القصص المتعلقة بادم عليه الصلاة و السلام

وذكرت الموسوعة اليهودية ذلك نقلا عن المستشرق زونز :
Another legend connects the building of the Kaaba with Abraham. When the time came for Adam to die, he had forgotten the gift of forty years to David, and had to be reminded of it by the Angel of Death. He is said to have been buried in the "Cave of Treasures"—a Christian, rather than a Jewish, idea.

Several of these peculiar features are found again in the Pirḳe de-Rabbi Eliezer, a work that was compiled under Arabic influence

(Zunz, "G. V." 2d ed., pp. 289 et seq.).

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/758-adam

و نقرا في مقدمة مدراش فرقي العازر :
Composed in Talmudic Israel/Babylon (c.630 - c.1030 CE). Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer (Chapters of Rabbi Eliezer) is an aggadic-midrashic work on the Torah containing exegesis and retellings of biblical stories. The composition enjoyed widespread circulation and recognition throughout Jewish history, and continues to do so in the present. Traditionally, it has been understood to be a tannaitic composition which originated with the tanna Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, - a disciple of Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakai and teacher of Rabbi Akiva - and his disciples.

However, modern scholarship has shown the book in fact a a medieval work from the 8th Century.

The work is divided into 54 chapters, which may be divided into seven groups. Pirke De-Rabbi Eliezer comprises exegesis, legends and folklore, as well as astronomical discussions related to the story of the Creation. The author dwells longest on the description of the second day of Creation, in which the Ma'aseh ha-Merkavah (Ezek. i.) is described in various forms.

https://www.sefaria.org/Pirkei_DeRabbi_Eliezer?lang=en

2. النص يختلف عن النص القراني في عدة نقاط

:

نص المدراش يتكلم عن سجود جميع المخلوقات لا الملائكة بينما النص القراني يتكلم عن سجود الملائكة

نص المدراش يخلو من امر الله عز وجل بالسجود لادم عليه الصلاة و السلام

نص المدراش يذكر ان السجود جاءت نتيجة لخوف من ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام لانه وبحسب النص ظنوا ان ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام هو الله و العياذ بالله بينما القران يذكر ان سجود الملائكة تم نتيجة امر الهي

.

2. مدراش تكوين رباه

:

النص المدعى للاقتباس :

مدراش تكوين رباه الجزء الثامن :

Said R’ Hosha`ya: In the moment that the Holy One created Adam Harishon, the first Human,

the ministering angels erred and sought to say ‘Holy/Qadosh’ before him (to worship him)

. . . What did the Holy One do? ‘He cast upon him deep sleep’ [Gn 2:21] and all knew that he was Adam.

https://www.sefaria.org/Bereishit_Rabbah.8.10?lang=en

و دعوى الاقتباس هنا مردودة لسببين :

1. مدراش تكوين رباه تم تاليفه في القرن الرابع او الخامس الميلادي حسب قول المحققين و هو قبل الاسلام الا انه تعرض لكثير من الاضافات و التنقيحات و التغيير على مدى القرون مما يدعونا للشك في ان مثل هذا النص وجد قبل الاسلام

.

نقرا من مقدمة المدراش :
Composed in Talmudic Israel/Babylon (500 CE). Bereshith Rabbah (The Great Genesis) is a midrash comprising a collection of rabbinical homiletical interpretations of the Book of Genesis. It contains many simple explanations of words and sentences, often in Aramaic, suitable for the instruction of youth. It also contains varied haggadic expositions popular in the public lectures of the synagogues and schools. The tradition that Rabbi Hoshaiah is the author of Genesis Rabbah may be taken to mean that he began the work as numerous additions have been made over the subsequent years before it was redacted (4th-5th Century CE). The editor strung together various longer or shorter explanations and haggadic interpretations of the successive passages, sometimes anonymously, sometimes citing the author.

Even then the text was probably not closed, for longer or shorter passages could always be added, the number of prefatory passages to a section be increased, and those existing be enlarged by accretion

. It is divided into sections variably numbered between 97-101. This arrangement shows some similarity with the triennial reading of the Torah as was practised in Israel.

https://www.sefaria.org/Bereishit_Rabbah?lang=en

و نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية :
Perhaps the comments on Genesis were originally divided into parashiyot that corresponded with the above-mentioned sections of the text, and that contained the beginnings of the simplest introductions, as indeed the first traces of such introductions are found also in the tannaitic Midrash. But the embellishment of the parashiyot with numerous artistic introductions—which points to a combination of the form of the running commentary with the form of the finished homilies following the type of the Pesiḳta and Tanḥuma Midrashim—

was certainly the result of the editing of the Bereshit Rabbah that is now extant, when the material found in collections and traditions of the haggadic exegesis of the period of the Amoraim was taken up in the Midrash, and the Bereshit Rabbah was given its present form, if not its present bulk. Perhaps the editor made use also of different collections on the several parts of Genesis.

...

It is difficult to ascertain the exact date of the actual editing of the Bereshit Rabbah; it was probably undertaken not much later than that of the Jerusalem Talmud. But even then the text was probably not finally closed, for longer or shorter passages could always be added, the number of prefatory passages to a parashah be increased, and those existing be enlarged by accretion.

Thus, beginning with the sidra Wayishlaḥ, extensive passages are found that bear the marks of the later Haggadah, and have points of connection with the Tanḥuma homilies. The passages were probably added at an early date, since they are not entirely missing in the older manuscripts, which are free from many other additions and glosses that are found in the present editions. In the concluding chapters the Bereshit Rabbah seems to have remained defective. In the parashiyot of the sidra Wayiggash the comment is no longer carried out verse by verse; the last parashah of this pericope, as well as the first of the sidra Wayeḥi, is probably drawn from Tanḥuma homilies; the comment to the whole 48th chapter of Genesis is missing in all the manuscripts (with one exception), and to verses 1-14 in the editions; the remaining portion of this sidra, the comment on Jacob's blessing (Gen. xlix.), is found in all the manuscripts—with the above-mentioned exceptions—in a revision showing later additions, a revision that was also used by the compiler of the Tanḥuma Midrash edited by Buber.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...ereshit-rabbah

نقرا من ENCYCLOPEDIA JUDAICA:
Nevertheless, the question of "exactly what a rabbinic redactor does with the material he is revising" can be determined only on the level of individual passages, and it is more than likely that in some cases the redactor of Genesis Rabbah reworked an earlier literary tradition which is preserved in a more original form in the Jerusalem Talmud, whereas in other cases the opposite may be the case.

This can be explained by positing that some of the aggadot and halakhot which occur in both Genesis Rabbah and the Jerusalem Talmud were derived from earlier common sources (perhaps from oral traditions). Alternatively, both Genesis Rabbah and the Jerusalem Talmud may have undergone successive revisions (as did the Babylonian Talmud), even after they took on a fairly distinct and identifiable literary form as redactional wholes, such that either one of them could have drawn upon a version of the other which differs in some respects from the works which we possess today

. Therefore the artificial linking of the important issue of the nature of rabbinic redactional revision of earlier literary sources to the broader (and far less significant) question of possible literary dependence of one or the other of these two finished and complete literary works on the other only leads to methodological and conceptual confusion.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/religio...genesis-rabbah

و كل هذا مع الاخذ بعين الاعتبار ان اقدم مخطوطتين لهذا المدراس ترجعان الى القرنين الحادي عشر و الثاني عشر !!! فلا يمكن حينها التاكد من صحة اصالة النص المدعى للاقتباس

نقرا من المصدر السابق :
This edition is one of the finest such works of modern rabbinic scholarship. It was begun by J. *Theodor in 1903 and completed in 1936 by Ḥ. *Albeck, who also wrote the introduction. From the numerous manuscripts at his disposal, Theodor chose the London manuscript,

written about the middle of the 12th century

. Careful examination of the manuscripts by Albeck, however, established the manuscript Vatican 30,

copied in the 11th century, as superior

. The London manuscript is probably a later formulation of the same tradition recorded in the Vatican manuscript.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/religio...genesis-rabbah

2. الاختلافات الشاسعة بين النص المدعى للاقتباس و بين النص القراني

:

النص المدراشي يذكر ان الملائكة يتحدث عن ارادة الملائكة تلقيب ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام بالقدوس بينما النص القراني يتحدث عن السجود

النص المدراشي يخلو من امر الله عز وجل للملائكة على عكس القران

النص المدراشي يتكلم عن انامة الله عز وجل للملائكة حتى لا يلقبوا ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام بالقدوس بينما النص القراني يتكلم عن امتثال الملائكة عليهم السلام لله عز وجل بالسجود لادم عليه الصلاة و السلام

.

3. مدراش تنحوما :

النص المدعى للاقتباس :

مدراش تنحوما PEKUDE 3
There were twelve hours in that day. During the first hour He collected the dust for the body of man; in the second hour He kneaded the dust of the east and the west together, as it is said: Thou hast hemmed me in behind and before (Ps. 139:4). Behind refers to the west, and before to the east, as is said: Before the east side (Exod. 38:13). The creatures of the earth saw him and feared him.

They believed that he was their creator. They came and bowed down before him, and he said to them: “Why do you come to bow before me?”

“All of us have come because we have seen all the creatures that the Holy One, blessed be he, has created.

https://www.sefaria.org/Midrash_Tanc...i.3.18?lang=en

دعوى الاقتباس مردودة لسببين :

1. مدراش تنحوما ماتخر عن الاسلام فقد تم تاليفه حسب راي كثير من النقاد في فترة ما بعد الفتح الاسلامي للشام

:

نقرا من Encyclopedia Judaica:
The Middle Period

To the period from the Muslim conquest (c. 640 c.e.) to the end of the tenth century belong many variegated midrashic and aggadic works. In addition to the exegetical and homiletical types of Midrash, the above-mentioned composition by a single person belongs to this period. The most important group of Midrashim of this period – all of which are homiletical – are those of the Tanḥuma Midrash (*Tanḥuma Yelammedenu) group in which the old and the new are used indiscriminately

. Of the exegetical Midrashim, particular mention may be made of Ecclesiastes Rabbah, Midrash Samuel, Midrash Proverbs (greatly influenced by the apocalyptic and Heikhalot literatures), Midrash Tehillim i, Exodus Rabbah i, and the series of smaller *Midrashim (Midreshei Zuta) to four of the five *scrolls. In all these too, marks of the old and the new, both in content and in form, appear together. Among the aggadic works the most important are: Seder Eliyahu Rabbah and Seder Eliyahu Zuta; Pirkei de-R. Eliezer (compiled apparently close to 750); Midrash Agur, also called Mishnat R. Eliezer; and a further series of smaller compositions. In most of them external influences from the Muslim (Pirkei de-R. Eliezer) or Byzantine (The Throne and Hippodrome of Solomon, etc.) eras can be seen.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/philoso...udaism/midrash

2. الاختلافات بين القصة القرانية و القصة المدراشية :

نفس الاختلافات بين النص القراني و بين نص مدراش فرقي العازر

القصة المدراشية هنا تذكر ان سجود المخلوقات كان بسبب ظنهم ان ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام هو الله عز وجل و العياذ بالله

القصة المدراشية هنا تذكر ان ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام سال المخلوقات بعد سجودهم له عن سبب السجود (و هذا غير موجود في القصة القرانية)

.

ثانيا : سفر اخنوخ الثاني (الترجمة السلافية لسفر اخنوخ)

.

النص المدعى للاقتباس :
الفصل الواحد و الثلاثون لسفر اخنوخ الثاني
1 Adam has life on earth, and I created a garden in Eden in the east, that he should observe the testament and keep the command.
2 I made the heavens open to him, that he should see the angels singing the song of victory, and the gloomless light.
3 And he was continuously in paradise, and the devil understood that I wanted to create another world, because Adam was lord on earth, to rule and control it.
4 The devil is the evil spirit of the lower places, as a fugitive he made Sotona from the heavens as his name was Satanail (Satan), thus he became different from the angels, (but his nature) did not change (his) intelligence as far as (his) understanding of righteous and sinful (things).
5 And he understood his condemnation

and the sin which he had sinned before

, therefore he conceived thought against Adam, in such form he entered and seduced Eva (Eve), but did not touch Adam.

دعوى الاقتباس مردودة لسببين :

1. سفر اخنوخ الثاني متاخر عن الاسلام حيث يرجع هذا العمل الى القرن العاشر او الحادي عشر

نقرا من ECYCLOPEDIA OF JUDAICA:
ENOCH, SLAVONIC BOOK OF (known as ii Enoch ; abbr. ii En. ; also entitled the Book of the Secrets of Enoch , or several variations on this), apocryphal work

translated in the tenth or 11th century from Greek into Slavonic. The dating is deduced from the evidence of certain linguistic peculiarities

. The first complete edition of the work was published by A. Popov in 1880. It was edited and studied by M. Sokolov (1899 and 1910) who made a special examination of the quotations from Old Russian literature it contains. An edition and translation of the work into French was made by A. Vaillant (1952). There are considerable differences between the two recensions (one long and one short) found in the manuscripts.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/religio...-slavonic-book

و حسب الموسوعة اليهودية فان سفر اخنوخ الاول (اليوناني و الذي منه جاءت الترجمة السلافية المعروفة بسفر اخنوخ الثاني) ليس من المصادر التي تحتوي على القصة او ما يشابهها فهي اذا مجرد عمل اضافي في الترجمة السلافية

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية :
Far older, and blended with Babylonian mythology (Isa. xiv. 12), is

the story preserved in Adam and Eve, the Slavonic Book of Enoch, xxxi. 3-6

(

compare Bereshit Rabbati, ed. Epstein, p. 17; Pirḳe R. El. xiii.; Chronicle of Jerahmeel, xxii.; and Koran, sura ii. 34; xv. 30)

, according to which all the angels were commanded by Michael the archangel to pay homage to the image of God; whereupon all bowed before Adam except Satan, who, in punishment for his rebelliousness, was hurled from his heavenly
heights to the depth of the abyss, while his vacant throne was reserved for Adam, to be given to him at the time of the future resurrection.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/758-adam

2. الاختلافات الشاسعة بين القصتين :

لا وجود لامر بالسجود للملائكة و لا حتى سجود المخلوقات و لا امتناع ابليس لعنه الله عن السجود و لا كل ذلك انما هي اشارة طفيفة في العدد الخامس لاثم ارتكبه ابليس لعنه الله سابقا دون تحديد ما هو هذا الاثم

.

ثالثا : كتاب Chronicles of Jerahmeel

:

النص المدعى للاقتباس :

الفصل السادس من الكتاب الصفحة 18 :
God; his height extended from the east to the west, as it is said, 'Behind and in front Thou hast formed me.' Behind, that is the west, and in front, that is the east.

All the creatures saw him and were afraid of him; they thought he was their creator, and prostrated themselves before him. Adam then said to the animals: 'Why do you come and prostrate yourselves before me?

https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/coj/coj010.htm

دعوى الاقتباس مردودة لسببين :

1. هذا الكتاب تم تاليفه في القرن الرابع عشر الميلادي اي بعد سبع قرون من ظهور الاسلام !! فهو متاخر جدا !!!

نقرا من مقدمة الكتاب الصفحة 21 :
. I had the whole manuscript copied out, with a view to its ultimate publication, in 1888. And now the first part of it, dealing with Scripture history from the Creation down to the death of Judas Maccabeus, forms the present publication.

The compilation of the manuscript is due to a certain Eleasar ben Asher the Levite, who lived at the beginning of the fourteenth century somewhere in the Rhine Provinces, and whose preface I have reproduced as faithfully as possible

. In it he states that he has collected the books from far and wide, and combined them into one consecutive whole, fully conscious of the fact that no such book had ever been prepared before, and charging his children with the faithful preservation of this record of his labours of many years, continued under great stress and with great difficulties.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/coj/coj003.htm

2. الاختلافات بين القصة القرانية و بين ما هو موجود في كتاب Chronicles of Jerahmeel:

نفس الاختلافات بين القصة القرانية و القصة في مدراش تنحوما تقريبا

يتبع

**محمد سني 1989** · 13-06-2019, 01:33

رابعا : الترجمة اللاتينية لكتاب حياة ادم و حواء المعروف ب Vita Adami et Evae

:

انقل النص المدعى للاقتباس من الموسوعة اليهودية :
But one day when the guarding angels had ascended to heaven to sing their hymn () to the Lord (Ḥul. 91b), Satan thought the time opportune to carry out his evil designs against Adam. Satan hated Adam, for he regarded him as the cause of his fall. After God had created man, He ordered all the angels to prostrate themselves before Adam, but Satan rebelled against God's command, despite the direct bidding of Michael "to worship the image of YHW" (), and answered proudly: "If God be angry against me, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God" (compare Isa. xiv. 13). Whereupon God "cast him out from heaven with all his host of rebellious angels" (Slavonic Book of Enoch, xxxi. 18, and Mek., Shirah, § 2).

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...9-adam-book-of

و الكتاب له نظير باليونانية و يسمى ب Apocalypsis Mosis اي رؤيا موسى

و اقول : ان دعوى الاقتباس هنا قائمة على اساس باطل الا و هي دعوى ان هذا السفر لا اصل له و هو عمل منحول لبعض الربانيين و الاحبار لمجرد عدم دخوله في قانونية اسفار الكتاب المقدس اليوم

و هذا مردود لاكثر من سبب :

اولا : ان الترجمة اللاتينية لكتاب حياة ادم و حواء Vita Adami et Evae و الترجمة اليونانية Apocalypse of Moses مقتبسان من اصل عبري مفقود يرجع تاريخ تدوينه الى فترة ما قبل تدمير الهيكل الثاني بل الى فترة ما قبل المسيح عليه الصلاة و السلام و تحديدا الفترة الهيلينية و هذا يعني انه قد يكون مستمد من تراث شفهي اقدم

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية :

There can be no doubt, however, that there existed at an early date, perhaps even before the destruction of the Second Temple, a collection of legends of Adam and Eve which have been partially preserved, not in their original language, but somewhat changed

. It is possible to prove that the apocryphas, Apocalypsis Mosis— as Tischendorf, following a copyist's erroneous inscription, called the book—and Vita Adæ et Evæ, and to a certain degree even their Slavonic, Syriac, Ethiopic, and Arabic offshoots,

are of identical Jewish origin

. According to these apocryphal works and to the Eastern and Western forms of the Apocalypsis, the Jewish portion of the Book of Adam must have read somewhat as follows (the parallels in apocryphal and rabbinical literature are placed in parentheses)

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...9-adam-book-of

نقرا من الموسوعة البريطانية :

Biography was an extremely popular literary genre during the late Hellenistic period of Judaism (3rd century BC to 3rd century AD

), and legends of biblical figures were numerous. But all surviving Haggada (folk stories and anecdotes) about Adam and Eve are Christian works and are preserved in a number of ancient languages (e.g., Greek, Latin, Ethiopic). Although all Aramaic and Hebrew texts have been lost, the basic material was presumably of Jewish authorship

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Life-of-Adam-and-Eve

ويقدر تاريخ تدوين الترجمتين اليونانية و اللاتينية بين الاعوام 20 قبل الميلاد - 70 بعد الميلاد

نقرا من الموسوعة البريطانية :
Extant versions of the Life of Adam and Eve have consequently been used to reconstruct the supposed original,

which was probably composed sometime between 20 BC and AD 70, because the apocalyptic portion of the work (chapter 29) seems to imply that the Herodian Temple of Jerusalem was functioning when the book was written

. The book is primarily noteworthy for its imaginative retelling of the biblical story and for its inclusion of visions and angelology, both characteristic of Hellenistic religious writing

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Life-of-Adam-and-Eve

ثانيا : السفر خالي من الاضافات النصرانية حسب اقوال النقاد فتراجمه تخلو من التعديلات و التنقيحات النصرانية مما يزيدنا وثاقة بقوة ارتباط هاتين الترجمتين بالاصل العبري

:

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية :
The reconstruction of the Jewish Book of Adam here attempted may be hypothetical in some points, for neither the Apoc. Mosis nor the Vita can be considered to represent a true copy of the original.

But it makes clear that these two apocryphas are based on the Hebrew or Aramaic Book of Adam

and that the latter belongs to the midrashic literature, as many of its allusions can only be explained by the Midrash.
...

With regard to the alleged Christian elements and reminiscences of the New Testament in the Apoc. Mosis and Vita they will be sufficiently characterized by the following examples: Apoc. Mosis, iii., "Child of Wrath," is based on a haggadic etymology of the name Cain, and has nothing to do with Eph. ii. 3; and Apoc. Mosis, xix., "Lust is the beginning of all sin," is thoroughly Jewish (see above), and need not therefore have been taken from such a source as James, i. 15. This, moreover, is the case with all the other alleged Christian passages in the Apoc. Mosis, which would prove nothing, even if they were of Christian origin; for it can not be surprising to find Christian allusions in the language of a book so widely read among Christians as the Apocrypha. Even passages where one would expect that a Christian editor or compiler would interject Christological notions are quite free from them; all of which tends to show that neither the Apoc. Mosis nor the Vita was in any way tampered with by Christian writers.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/759-adam-book-of

ثالثا : ان هذا السفر و هو كتاب حياة ادم و حواء يعتبر اقدم سفر يتكلم عن كون الشيطان هو الحية التي اغوت ادم و حواء في سفر التكوين بل لا يوجد سفر من اسفار العهد القديم يذكر ان الحية كانت ابليس و لا يوجد اي موضع حتى في العهد الجديد يذكر ان الحية كانت ابليس الا في سفر الرؤيا فقط و هو اخر اسفار العهد الجديد !!! بل لا يوجد اي نص في العهد القديم باكمله يذكر سقوط ابليس من السماء (باستثناء نص مبهم في اشعياء 14 :12 (كيف سقطت من السماء يا زهرة بنت الصبح) اولوها بانها تعني سقوط ابليس ) و سقوط ملائكته كذلك بعد حربهم مع الملائكة الصالحين بقيادة ميكائيل

.(سفر رؤيا يوحنا اللاهوتي 12: 7) وَحَدَثَتْ حَرْبٌ فِي السَّمَاءِ: مِيخَائِيلُ وَمَلاَئِكَتُهُ حَارَبُوا التِّنِّينَ، وَحَارَبَ التِّنِّينُ وَمَلاَئِكَتُهُ (سفر رؤيا يوحنا اللاهوتي 12: 8) وَلَمْ يَقْوَوْا، فَلَمْ يُوجَدْ مَكَانُهُمْ بَعْدَ ذلِكَ فِي السَّمَاءِ.
(سفر رؤيا يوحنا اللاهوتي 12: 9)

فَطُرِحَ التِّنِّينُ الْعَظِيمُ، الْحَيَّةُ الْقَدِيمَةُ الْمَدْعُوُّ إِبْلِيسَ وَالشَّيْطَا

نَ، الَّذِي يُضِلُّ الْعَالَمَ كُلَّهُ، طُرِحَ إِلَى الأَرْضِ، وَطُرِحَتْ مَعَهُ مَلاَئِكَتُهُ.

(سفر رؤيا يوحنا اللاهوتي 20: 2)

فَقَبَضَ عَلَى التِّنِّينِ، الْحَيَّةِ الْقَدِيمَةِ، الَّذِي هُوَ إِبْلِيسُ وَالشَّيْطَانُ

، وَقَيَّدَهُ أَلْفَ سَنَةٍ،

و كل هذا لا نجده في سفر التكوين ، نقرا من سفر التكوين 3
1. وَكَانَتِ الْحَيَّةُ أَحْيَلَ جَمِيعِ حَيَوَانَاتِ الْبَرِّيَّةِ الَّتِي عَمِلَهَا الرَّبُّ الإِلهُ، فَقَالَتْ لِلْمَرْأَةِ: «أَحَقًّا قَالَ اللهُ لاَ تَأْكُلاَ مِنْ كُلِّ شَجَرِ الْجَنَّةِ؟» 2 فَقَالَتِ الْمَرْأَةُ لِلْحَيَّةِ: «مِنْ ثَمَرِ شَجَرِ الْجَنَّةِ نَأْكُلُ،
3 وَأَمَّا ثَمَرُ الشَّجَرَةِ الَّتِي فِي وَسَطِ الْجَنَّةِ فَقَالَ اللهُ: لاَ تَأْكُلاَ مِنْهُ وَلاَ تَمَسَّاهُ لِئَلاَّ تَمُوتَا».
4 فَقَالَتِ الْحَيَّةُ لِلْمَرْأَةِ: «لَنْ تَمُوتَا!
5 بَلِ اللهُ عَالِمٌ أَنَّهُ يَوْمَ تَأْكُلاَنِ مِنْهُ تَنْفَتِحُ أَعْيُنُكُمَا وَتَكُونَانِ كَاللهِ عَارِفَيْنِ الْخَيْرَ وَالشَّرَّ».
6 فَرَأَتِ الْمَرْأَةُ أَنَّ الشَّجَرَةَ جَيِّدَةٌ لِلأَكْلِ، وَأَنَّهَا بَهِجَةٌ لِلْعُيُونِ، وَأَنَّ الشَّجَرَةَ شَهِيَّةٌ لِلنَّظَرِ. فَأَخَذَتْ مِنْ ثَمَرِهَا وَأَكَلَتْ، وَأَعْطَتْ رَجُلَهَا أَيْضًا مَعَهَا فَأَكَلَ.
7 فَانْفَتَحَتْ أَعْيُنُهُمَا وَعَلِمَا أَنَّهُمَا عُرْيَانَانِ. فَخَاطَا أَوْرَاقَ تِينٍ وَصَنَعَا لأَنْفُسِهِمَا مَآزِرَ.
8 وَسَمِعَا صَوْتَ الرَّبِّ الإِلهِ مَاشِيًا فِي الْجَنَّةِ عِنْدَ هُبُوبِ رِيحِ النَّهَارِ، فَاخْتَبَأَ آدَمُ وَامْرَأَتُهُ مِنْ وَجْهِ الرَّبِّ الإِلهِ فِي وَسَطِ شَجَرِ الْجَنَّةِ.
9 فَنَادَى الرَّبُّ الإِلهُ آدَمَ وَقَالَ لَهُ: «أَيْنَ أَنْتَ؟».
10 فَقَالَ: «سَمِعْتُ صَوْتَكَ فِي الْجَنَّةِ فَخَشِيتُ، لأَنِّي عُرْيَانٌ فَاخْتَبَأْتُ».
11 فَقَالَ: «مَنْ أَعْلَمَكَ أَنَّكَ عُرْيَانٌ؟ هَلْ أَكَلْتَ مِنَ الشَّجَرَةِ الَّتِي أَوْصَيْتُكَ أَنْ لاَ تَأْكُلَ مِنْهَا؟»
12 فَقَالَ آدَمُ: «الْمَرْأَةُ الَّتِي جَعَلْتَهَا مَعِي هِيَ أَعْطَتْنِي مِنَ الشَّجَرَةِ فَأَكَلْتُ».
13 فَقَالَ الرَّبُّ الإِلهُ لِلْمَرْأَةِ: «مَا هذَا الَّذِي فَعَلْتِ؟» فَقَالَتِ الْمَرْأَةُ: «الْحَيَّةُ غَرَّتْنِي فَأَكَلْتُ».
14 فَقَالَ الرَّبُّ الإِلهُ لِلْحَيَّةِ: «لأَنَّكِ فَعَلْتِ هذَا، مَلْعُونَةٌ أَنْتِ مِنْ جَمِيعِ الْبَهَائِمِ وَمِنْ جَمِيعِ وُحُوشِ الْبَرِّيَّةِ. عَلَى بَطْنِكِ تَسْعَيْنَ وَتُرَابًا تَأْكُلِينَ كُلَّ أَيَّامِ حَيَاتِكِ.
15 وَأَضَعُ عَدَاوَةً بَيْنَكِ وَبَيْنَ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَبَيْنَ نَسْلِكِ وَنَسْلِهَا. هُوَ يَسْحَقُ رَأْسَكِ، وَأَنْتِ تَسْحَقِينَ عَقِبَهُ».

و هذا يعني ان دعوى الاقتباس من كتاب حياة ادم و حواء من جهة المنصرين ملزمة لهم ايضا في مثل هذه المواضع و كما قال المثل : رمتني بدائها و انسلت

.

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية :

The high development of the demonology of the New Testament presupposes a long period of evolution. In the Gospels the beliefs of the lower orders of society find expression, and Satan and his kingdom are regarded as encompassing the entire world, and are factors in all the events of daily life

. In strict accordance with his manifold activity he bears many names, being called "Satan" (Matt. iv. 10; Mark i. 30, iv. 15; Luke x. 18 et passim), "devil" (Matt. iv. 1 et passim), "adversary" (I Peter v. 8, ἀντίδικος; I Tim. v. 14, ἀντικείμενος), "enemy" (Matt. xiii. 39), "accuser" (Rev. xii. 10), "old serpent" (ib. xx. 2), "great dragon" (ib. xii. 9), Beelzebub (Matt. x. 25, xii. 24, et passim), and Belial (comp. Samael). The fall of Satan is mentioned in Luke x. 18, John xii. 31, II Cor. vi. 16, and Rev. xii. 9. He is the author of all evil (Luke x. 19 et passim; Acts v. 3; II Cor. xi. 3; Ephes. ii. 2), who beguiled Eve (II Cor. xi. 3; Rev. xii. 9), and who brought death into the world (Heb. ii. 13), being ever the tempter (I Cor. vii. 5; I Thess. iii. 5; I Peter v. 8), even as he tempted Jesus (Matt. iv.). The belief in the devil as here developed dominated subsequent periods, and influenced indirectly the Jews themselves; nor has it been entirely discarded to-day.

Satan and his host are mentioned comparatively seldom in the Talmud and Midrash, although the material on this subject is not without importance.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13219-satan

رابعا : لم يكن للمسيحيين الاوائل و لا اباء الكنيسة نفس النظرة تجاه الاسفار الابوكريفية كما للنصارى اليوم بل ان في العهد الجديد اقتباسات واضحة من اسفار ابوكريفية

.

نقرا مثلا من قاموس الكتاب المقدس :

ويقتبس كاتب رسالة يهوذا في عددي 14و15 سفر أخنوخ ص 1: 9

.

وكذلك يوجد لبعض الأقوال الخاصة بأواخر الأيام في العهد الجديد ما يقابلها في سفر أخنوخ. و في سفر أخنوخ. وقد اقتبس بعض الآباء في العصور المسيحية الأولى بعض أقوال هذا السفر. ومن بين هؤلاء جاستين الشهيد وأرينيوس وأكليمندوس الاسكندري وأوريجانوس

. ولكن قادة المسيحيين فيما بعد أنكروا هذا الكتاب ورفضوه. ومن بين هؤلاء يوحنا فم الذهب وأغسطينوس وجيروم أو أورينيموس. ولم يعتبر اليهود او المسيحيون هذا الكتاب ضمن الأسفار القانونية.

https://st-takla.org/Full-Free-Coptic...A/A_121_1.html

تصريح اباء الكنيسة باقتباس العهد الجديد من اسفار ابوكريفية و اسفار ضائعة

اولا : تصريح جيروم

نقرا من انجيل متى 27:5 فَطَرَحَ الْفِضَّةَ فِي الْهَيْكَلِ وَانْصَرَفَ، ثُمَّ مَضَى وَخَنَقَ نَفْسَهُ. 6 فَأَخَذَ رُؤَسَاءُ الْكَهَنَةِ الْفِضَّةَ وَقَالُوا: «لاَ يَحِلُّ أَنْ نُلْقِيَهَا فِي الْخِزَانَةِ لأَنَّهَا ثَمَنُ دَمٍ».
7 فَتَشَاوَرُوا وَاشْتَرَوْا بِهَا حَقْلَ الْفَخَّارِيِّ مَقْبَرَةً لِلْغُرَبَاءِ.
8 لِهذَا سُمِّيَ ذلِكَ الْحَقْلُ «حَقْلَ الدَّمِ» إِلَى هذَا الْيَوْمِ.
9 حِينَئِذٍ تَمَّ

مَا قِيلَ بِإِرْمِيَا النَّبِيِّ

الْقَائِلِ: «وَأَخَذُوا الثَّلاَثِينَ مِنَ الْفِضَّةِ، ثَمَنَ الْمُثَمَّنِ الَّذِي ثَمَّنُوهُ مِنْ بَني إِسْرَائِيلَ،
10 وَأَعْطَوْهَا عَنْ حَقْلِ الْفَخَّارِيِّ، كَمَا أَمَرَنِي الرَّبُّ».

ذكر القديس جيروم ان ما اقتبسه متى في العدد التاسع موجود في احد الاسفار الابوكريفية لارمياء :يقول ادم كلارك في تفسيره :
Jeremy the prophet - The words quoted here are not found in the Prophet Jeremiah, but in Zac 11:13. But St.

Jerome says that a Hebrew of the sect of the Nazarenes showed him this prophecy in a Hebrew apocryphal copy of Jeremiah

; but probably they were inserted there only to countenance the quotation here.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/cmt/clarke/mat027.htm

ثانيا : تصريح يوحنا ذهبي الفم
نقرا في متى 2 :
19 فَلَمَّا مَاتَ هِيرُودُسُ، إِذَا مَلاَكُ الرَّبِّ قَدْ ظَهَرَ فِي حُلْمٍ لِيُوسُفَ فِي مِصْرَ20 قَائِلاً: «قُمْ وَخُذِ الصَّبِيَّ وَأُمَّهُ وَاذْهَبْ إِلَى أَرْضِ إِسْرَائِيلَ، لأَنَّهُ قَدْ مَاتَ الَّذِينَ كَانُوا يَطْلُبُونَ نَفْسَ الصَّبِيِّ».
21 فَقَامَ وَأَخَذَ الصَّبِيَّ وَأُمَّهُ وَجَاءَ إِلَى أَرْضِ إِسْرَائِيلَ.
22 وَلكِنْ لَمَّا سَمِعَ أَنَّ أَرْخِيلاَوُسَ يَمْلِكُ عَلَى الْيَهُودِيَّةِ عِوَضًا عَنْ هِيرُودُسَ أَبِيهِ، خَافَ أَنْ يَذْهَبَ إِلَى هُنَاكَ. وَإِذْ أُوحِيَ إِلَيْهِ فِي حُلْمٍ، انْصَرَفَ إِلَى نَوَاحِي الْجَلِيلِ.
23 وَأَتَى وَسَكَنَ فِي مَدِينَةٍ يُقَالُ لَهَا نَاصِرَ

ةُ، لِكَيْ يَتِمَّ مَا قِيلَ بِالأَنْبِيَاءِ: «إِنَّهُ سَيُدْعَى نَاصِرِيًّا

»

يصرح يوحنا ذهبي الفم ان العدد 23 لا يوجد في العهد القديم و لكنه ينتمي الى احد الاسفار الضائعة :نقرا من كتاب يوحنا ذهبي الفم Homilies on the Gospel of Matthew الفصل IX الصفحة 113
6. We see here the cause why the angel also, putting them at ease for
the future, restores them to their home. And not even this simply, but
he adds to it a prophecy, "That it might be fulfilled," saith he, "which
was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene."

And what manner of prophet said this? Be not curious, nor

overbusy. For many of the prophetic writings have been lost; and

this one may see from the history of the Chronicles.For being

negligent, and continually falling into ungodliness, some they

suffered to perish, others they themselves burnt upand cut to pieces.

The latter fact Jeremiah relates;the former, he who composed book of

Deuteronomy was hardly found, buried somewhere and lost

. But if,
when there was no barbarian there, they so betrayed their books,
much more when the barbarians had overrun them. For as to the
fact, that the prophet had foretold it, the apostles themselves in
many places call Him a Nazarene.

https://www.documentacatholicaomnia.e...atthew,_EN.pdf

خامسا : الاختلافات بين القصة في سفر حياة ادم و حواء و القصة القرانية :

لاوجود لسؤال ميكائيل لابليس بل السؤال عن سبب عدم السجود في القصة القرانية هو من الله عز وجل

لا وجود لسقوط الملائكة و ان منهم من اتبع ابليس في استكباره بل القران واضح ان الملاذكة كلهم سجدوا الا ابليس ابى و استكبر

لا وجود لالحاح من طرف ميكائيل لابليس ليسجد لادم في القران

لا وجود لحرب او ثورة مزعومة من قبل ابليس و جنده على الاله جل و علا في القران

**محمد سني 1989** · 13-06-2019, 01:34

الجزء الثاني : سؤال الملائكة لرب العزة عن خلق ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام .

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

قال تعالى : ((وَإِذْ قَالَ رَبُّكَ لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ إِنِّي جَاعِلٌ فِي الْأَرْضِ خَلِيفَةً ۖ قَالُوا أَتَجْعَلُ فِيهَا مَن يُفْسِدُ فِيهَا وَيَسْفِكُ الدِّمَاءَ وَنَحْنُ نُسَبِّحُ بِحَمْدِكَ وَنُقَدِّسُ لَكَ ۖ قَالَ إِنِّي أَعْلَمُ مَا لَا تَعْلَمُونَ (30) ))

تذكر الاية الكريمة استفهام الملائكة لرب العزة جل جلاله عن سبب خلق ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام و يدعي اعداء الاسلام اليوم من الملاحدة و المنصرين ان هذه القصة مقتبسة من كتب يهودية متاخرة و هي مجرد كتب تفسيرية تحتوي على الاساطير لا اقل و لا اكثر

و الحقيقة عكس ذلك اذ ان المتتبع للمصادر التي يدعون اقتباس القران منها لا تخلو ان تكون احدى اثنتين :

1. مصادر بعد الاسلام (بعد القرن السابع)

2. مصادر جمعت بشكل اولي قبل الاسلام بزمن بسيط و لكنها تعرضت لاضافات و تنقيحات كثيرة لقرون امتدت الى فترة ما بعد الاسلام

و المصادر التي يدعي هؤلاء الاقتباس منها هي :
1. مدراش تكوين رباه
2. مدراش تحليم

وسنرد باذن الله على كل نقطة على حدة

اولا : مدراش تكوين رباه :

النص المدعى للاقتباس :
نقرا في مدراش تكوين رباه الفصل الثامن :
5. R. Simon said: When the Holy One, blessed be He,
came to create Adam, the ministering angels formed
themselves into groups and parties, some of them saying,
'Let him be created/ whilst others urged, 'Let him not
be created/ Thus it is written, Love and Truth fought
together, Righteousness and Peace combated each other (Ps.
lxxxv, n) 1 : Love said, 'Let him be created, because he
will dispense acts of love'; Truth said, 'Let him not be
created, because he is compounded of falsehood' ; Righteous-
ness said, 'Let him be created, because he will perform
righteous deeds'; Peace said, 'Let him not be created,
because he is full of strife.' What did the Lord do? He
took Truth and cast it to the ground. Said the ministering
angels before the Holy One, blessed be He, 'Sovereign
of the Universe ! Why dost Thou despise Thy seal ? 2 Let
Truth arise from the earth!' Hence it is written, Let truth
spring up from the earth

https://archive.org/stream/RabbaGene...57mbp_djvu.txt

دعوى الاقتباس هنا مردودة لسببين :

1. مدراش تكوين رباه تم تاليفه في القرن الرابع او الخامس الميلادي حسب قول المحققين و هو قبل الاسلام الا انه تعرض لكثير من الاضافات و التنقيحات و التغيير على مدى القرون مما يدعونا للشك في ان مثل هذا النص وجد قبل الاسلام .

نقرا من مقدمة المدراش :
Composed in Talmudic Israel/Babylon (500 CE). Bereshith Rabbah (The Great Genesis) is a midrash comprising a collection of rabbinical homiletical interpretations of the Book of Genesis. It contains many simple explanations of words and sentences, often in Aramaic, suitable for the instruction of youth. It also contains varied haggadic expositions popular in the public lectures of the synagogues and schools. The tradition that Rabbi Hoshaiah is the author of Genesis Rabbah may be taken to mean that he began the work as numerous additions have been made over the subsequent years before it was redacted (4th-5th Century CE). The editor strung together various longer or shorter explanations and haggadic interpretations of the successive passages, sometimes anonymously, sometimes citing the author.

Even then the text was probably not closed, for longer or shorter passages could always be added, the number of prefatory passages to a section be increased, and those existing be enlarged by accretion.

It is divided into sections variably numbered between 97-101. This arrangement shows some similarity with the triennial reading of the Torah as was practised in Israel.

https://www.sefaria.org/Bereishit_Rabbah?lang=en

و نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية :
Perhaps the comments on Genesis were originally divided into parashiyot that corresponded with the above-mentioned sections of the text, and that contained the beginnings of the simplest introductions, as indeed the first traces of such introductions are found also in the tannaitic Midrash. But the embellishment of the parashiyot with numerous artistic introductions—which points to a combination of the form of the running commentary with the form of the finished homilies following the type of the Pesiḳta and Tanḥuma Midrashim—

was certainly the result of the editing of the Bereshit Rabbah that is now extant, when the material found in collections and traditions of the haggadic exegesis of the period of the Amoraim was taken up in the Midrash, and the Bereshit Rabbah was given its present form, if not its present bulk. Perhaps the editor made use also of different collections on the several parts of Genesis.

...It is difficult to ascertain the exact date of the actual editing of the Bereshit Rabbah; it was probably undertaken not much later than that of the Jerusalem Talmud. But even then the text was probably not finally closed, for longer or shorter passages could always be added, the number of prefatory passages to a parashah be increased, and those existing be enlarged by accretion.

Thus, beginning with the sidra Wayishlaḥ, extensive passages are found that bear the marks of the later Haggadah, and have points of connection with the Tanḥuma homilies. The passages were probably added at an early date, since they are not entirely missing in the older manuscripts, which are free from many other additions and glosses that are found in the present editions. In the concluding chapters the Bereshit Rabbah seems to have remained defective. In the parashiyot of the sidra Wayiggash the comment is no longer carried out verse by verse; the last parashah of this pericope, as well as the first of the sidra Wayeḥi, is probably drawn from Tanḥuma homilies; the comment to the whole 48th chapter of Genesis is missing in all the manuscripts (with one exception), and to verses 1-14 in the editions; the remaining portion of this sidra, the comment on Jacob's blessing (Gen. xlix.), is found in all the manuscripts—with the above-mentioned exceptions—in a revision showing later additions, a revision that was also used by the compiler of the Tanḥuma Midrash edited by Buber.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...ereshit-rabbah

نقرا من ENCYCLOPEDIA JUDAICA:
Nevertheless, the question of "exactly what a rabbinic redactor does with the material he is revising" can be determined only on the level of individual passages, and it is more than likely that in some cases the redactor of Genesis Rabbah reworked an earlier literary tradition which is preserved in a more original form in the Jerusalem Talmud, whereas in other cases the opposite may be the case.

This can be explained by positing that some of the aggadot and halakhot which occur in both Genesis Rabbah and the Jerusalem Talmud were derived from earlier common sources (perhaps from oral traditions). Alternatively, both Genesis Rabbah and the Jerusalem Talmud may have undergone successive revisions (as did the Babylonian Talmud), even after they took on a fairly distinct and identifiable literary form as redactional wholes, such that either one of them could have drawn upon a version of the other which differs in some respects from the works which we possess today.

Therefore the artificial linking of the important issue of the nature of rabbinic redactional revision of earlier literary sources to the broader (and far less significant) question of possible literary dependence of one or the other of these two finished and complete literary works on the other only leads to methodological and conceptual confusion.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/religio...genesis-rabbah

و كل هذا مع الاخذ بعين الاعتبار ان اقدم مخطوطتين لهذا المدراس ترجعان الى القرنين الحادي عشر و الثاني عشر !!! فلا يمكن حينها التاكد من صحة اصالة النص المدعى للاقتباس

نقرا من المصدر السابق :
This edition is one of the finest such works of modern rabbinic scholarship. It was begun by J. *Theodor in 1903 and completed in 1936 by Ḥ. *Albeck, who also wrote the introduction. From the numerous manuscripts at his disposal, Theodor chose

the London manuscript, written about the middle of the 12th century.

Careful examination of the manuscripts by Albeck, however,

established the manuscript Vatican 30, copied in the 11th century, as superior.

The London manuscript is probably a later formulation of the same tradition recorded in the Vatican manuscript.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/religio...genesis-rabbah

2.

الاختلافات الشاسعة بين النص المدعى للاقتباس و بين النص القراني

:

النص المدراشي يتكلم عن صراع في الاراء بين الملائكة فملاك الحق لا يريد ان يخلق الله عز وجل ادم بينما ملاك الحب يطالب بان يخلق الله عز وجل ادم ، و كذلك الحال بين ملاك الصلاح و ملاك السلام فملاك الصلاح يريد ان يخلق الله عز وجل ادم بينما ملاك السلام لا يريد ان يخلق الله عز وجل ادم . اما النص القراني فهو صريح في ان الملائكة كلهم كانوا في صف واحد

النص المدراشي يتكلم مطالب يقدمها الملائكة لله عز وجل عياذا بالله و في هذا سوء ادب و ظن سيء ممن كتب القصة المدراشية اذ انه لا يحق لاحد ان يطالب الله عز وجل بشيء. اما النص القراني فيقرر ان كلام الملائكة كان عن طريق الاستفهام لا الامر او المطالبة و حاشا ذلك الملائكة الكرام عليهم السلام

النص المدراشي يتكلم عن رغبات الملائكة في الخلق او عدم الخلق . اما النص القراني فيتكلم عن سؤال من الملائكة لله عز وجل عن الحكمة من خلق البشر في الارض مع علمهم بانه قد يصدر منهم الفساد في الارض

.

ثانيا : مدراش تحليم :

النص المدعى للاقتباس :
مدراش تحليم الفصل الثامن :
"The LORD is our Master, how mighty is Your Name in all the earth." Rav said: "We find three places where the angels prosecuted God; the creation of man, the tabernacle, and the giving of the Torah." Where do we find [this phenomenon] regarding man? When God wished to create man he consulted the angels as it says (Genesis 1:26) "Let Us make man." They began to say "What is man that you recall him?!" [God] replied " Tomorrow you'll see how smart he is."

https://www.sefaria.org/Midrash_Tehillim.8.2?lang=bi

دعوى الاقتباس مردودة لسببين:

1. مدراش تحليم يرجع بداية تالفيه في القرن الحادي عشر الميلادي فهو اذا متاخر عن الاسلام و حسب قول النقاد فان المدراش كان عبر العصور كالكتاب المفتوح فقد احتوى على عدد كبير من الاضافات بل و ان اقدم مخطوطاتها المتوفرة حاليا ترجع للقرن السادس عشر و هي مخطوطة القسطنطنية

:

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ECYCLOPEDIA:

Haggadic midrash, known since the eleventh century, when it was quoted by Nathan of Rome in his "'Aruk" (s.v. ), by R. Isaac b. Judah ibn Ghayyat in his "Halakot"

(1

b), and by Rashi in his commentary on I Sam. xvii. 49, and on many other passages

. This midrash is called also "Agadat Tehillim" (Rashi on Deut. xxxiii. 7 and many other passages), or "Haggadat Tehillim" ("'Aruk," s.v. , and in six other passages). From the twelfth century it was called also "Shoḥer Ṭob" (see Midrash Tehillim, ed. Buber, Introduction, pp. 35 et seq.), because it begins with the verse Prov. xi. 29, "Shoḥer ṭob," etc.

The true midrash covers only Ps. i.-cxviii.; and this is all that is found either in the manuscripts orin the first edition (Constantinople, 1512)

.

In the second edition (Salonica, 1515) a supplement was added covering, with the exception of two psalms, Ps. cxix.-cl. The author of this supplement was probably R. Mattithiah Yiẓhari of Saragossa, who collected the scattered haggadot on Ps. cxix.-cl. from the Yalḳuṭ, adding comments of his own. Since there are in the Yalḳuṭ no haggadic interpretations of Ps. cxxiii. and cxxxi.,....

It has been said that the date of the redaction of the midrash can not be determined. Haggadic collections on the Psalms were made at a very early time, and are mentioned several times in the Talmudim and in Genesis Rabbah, e.g., Yer. Kil. ix. 32b; Yer. Ket. xii. 3, 35a; Gen. R. xxxiii. 2; Ḳid. 33a (comp. Rashi ad loc.).

But it can not possibly be assumed that the haggadah collections on the Psalms are identical with the present Midrash Tehillim, since the latter contains many elements of later date

. It can not be denied, however, that much material from those old collections is included in the present midrash. It must therefore be assumed that parts of the old collections had been preserved among the later haggadists. Then, when a midrash to the Psalms was undertaken together with the other midrashim, homilies and comments on single verses were collected from the most diverse sources, and were arranged together with the earlier haggadic material on the Psalms, following the sequence of the Psalms themselves.

In the course of time this collection was supplemented and enlarged by the additions of various collections and editors, until the Midrash Tehillim finally took its present form.

Its definitive completion must, according to Zunz, be assigned to the last centuries of the period of the Geonim, without attempting to determine an exact date.

But Zunz's assumption, that the midrash was compiled in Italy, can not be accepted. The work was edited in Palestine, as appears from the language, style, and manner of haggadic interpretations. Nearly all the amoraim mentioned in it are Palestinians, and the few Babylonian amoraim referred to, e.g...

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...drash-tehillim

و نقرا من مقدمة مدراش تلحيم
Composed in Narbonne

(c.1050 - c.1450 CE

)

https://www.sefaria.org/Midrash_Tehillim?lang=bi

2. الاختلافات بين النص المدراشي و بين النص القراني

:

النص المدراشي يتكلم عن استشارة الله عز وجل للملائكة في خلق ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام بينما النص القراني يرفع و ينزه رب العزة عن مثل هذا فالنص القراني يصرح ان الله عز وجل ذكر للملائكة انه سيجعل في الارض خليفة من باب الاعلام و ليس الاستشارة و حاشا رب العزة ذلك

صيغة استعلام الملائكة في النص المدراشي تختلف عن صيغتها في النص القراني فالنص القراني يذكر ان استعلام الملائكة عن الحكمة من خلق الانسان كان في مقابل ما عرفوه من احتمالية الفساد في الارض عن طريق بني ادم بينما السؤال في النص المدراشي لم يذكر الفساد في الارض و لا غيره انما كان سؤالا عاما

.

**محمد سني 1989** · 13-06-2019, 01:37

الجزء الثالث : قصة تعليم الله عز وجل ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام الاسماء كلها .

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

قال تعالى : ((وَعَلَّمَ آدَمَ الْأَسْمَاءَ كُلَّهَا ثُمَّ عَرَضَهُمْ عَلَى الْمَلَائِكَةِ فَقَالَ أَنبِئُونِي بِأَسْمَاءِ هَٰؤُلَاءِ إِن كُنتُمْ صَادِقِينَ (31) قَالُوا سُبْحَانَكَ لَا عِلْمَ لَنَا إِلَّا مَا عَلَّمْتَنَا ۖ إِنَّكَ أَنتَ الْعَلِيمُ الْحَكِيمُ (32) قَالَ يَا آدَمُ أَنبِئْهُم بِأَسْمَائِهِمْ ۖ فَلَمَّا أَنبَأَهُم بِأَسْمَائِهِمْ قَالَ أَلَمْ أَقُل لَّكُمْ إِنِّي أَعْلَمُ غَيْبَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَأَعْلَمُ مَا تُبْدُونَ وَمَا كُنتُمْ تَكْتُمُونَ (33) ))

تذكر الاية الكريمة تعليم الله عز وجل ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام الاسماء كلها و يدعي اعداء الاسلام اليوم من الملاحدة و المنصرين ان هذه القصة مقتبسة من كتب يهودية متاخرة و هي مجرد كتب تفسيرية تحتوي على الاساطير لا اقل و لا اكثر

و الحقيقة عكس ذلك اذ ان المتتبع للمصادر التي يدعون اقتباس القران منها لا تخلو ان تكون احدى اثنتين :

1. مصادر بعد الاسلام (بعد القرن السابع)

2. مصادر جمعت بشكل اولي قبل الاسلام بزمن بسيط و لكنها تعرضت لاضافات و تنقيحات كثيرة لقرون امتدت الى فترة ما بعد الاسلام

و المصادر التي يدعي هؤلاء الاقتباس منها هي :

1. مدراش تكوين رباه

2. مدراش تحليم

وسنرد باذن الله على كل نقطة على حدة

اولا : مدراش تكوين رباه :

النص المدعى للاقتباس :
نقرا في مدراش تكوين رباه الفصل الثامن :
that Thou thinkest of him? (Ps. viii, 5). This trouble, for
what has it been created?' 'If so/ said He to them, 'Sheep
and oxen, all of them (ib. 8), why were they created ; why
were The fowl of the air and the fish of the sea (ih. 9) created ?
A tower full of good things and no guests — what pleasure
has its owner in having filled it?' Said they to Him:
' Sovereign of the Universe ! O Lord, our Lord, how glorious
is Thy name in all the earth (ib. 10). Do what pleaseth
Thee!'

https://archive.org/stream/RabbaGene...57mbp_djvu.txt

دعوى الاقتباس هنا مردودة لسببين :

1. مدراش تكوين رباه تم تاليفه في القرن الرابع او الخامس الميلادي حسب قول المحققين و هو قبل الاسلام الا انه تعرض لكثير من الاضافات و التنقيحات و التغيير على مدى القرون مما يدعونا للشك في ان مثل هذا النص وجد قبل الاسلام .

نقرا من مقدمة المدراش :
Composed in Talmudic Israel/Babylon (500 CE). Bereshith Rabbah (The Great Genesis) is a midrash comprising a collection of rabbinical homiletical interpretations of the Book of Genesis. It contains many simple explanations of words and sentences, often in Aramaic, suitable for the instruction of youth. It also contains varied haggadic expositions popular in the public lectures of the synagogues and schools. The tradition that Rabbi Hoshaiah is the author of Genesis Rabbah may be taken to mean that he began the work as numerous additions have been made over the subsequent years before it was redacted (4th-5th Century CE). The editor strung together various longer or shorter explanations and haggadic interpretations of the successive passages, sometimes anonymously, sometimes citing the author.

Even then the text was probably not closed, for longer or shorter passages could always be added, the number of prefatory passages to a section be increased, and those existing be enlarged by accretion.

It is divided into sections variably numbered between 97-101. This arrangement shows some similarity with the triennial reading of the Torah as was practised in Israel.

https://www.sefaria.org/Bereishit_Rabbah?lang=en

و نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية :
Perhaps the comments on Genesis were originally divided into parashiyot that corresponded with the above-mentioned sections of the text, and that contained the beginnings of the simplest introductions, as indeed the first traces of such introductions are found also in the tannaitic Midrash. But the embellishment of the parashiyot with numerous artistic introductions—which points to a combination of the form of the running commentary with the form of the finished homilies following the type of the Pesiḳta and Tanḥuma Midrashim—

was certainly the result of the editing of the Bereshit Rabbah that is now extant, when the material found in collections and traditions of the haggadic exegesis of the period of the Amoraim was taken up in the Midrash, and the Bereshit Rabbah was given its present form, if not its present bulk. Perhaps the editor made use also of different collections on the several parts of Genesis.

...It is difficult to ascertain the exact date of the actual editing of the Bereshit Rabbah; it was probably undertaken not much later than that of the Jerusalem Talmud. But even then the text was probably not finally closed, for longer or shorter passages could always be added, the number of prefatory passages to a parashah be increased, and those existing be enlarged by accretion.

Thus, beginning with the sidra Wayishlaḥ, extensive passages are found that bear the marks of the later Haggadah, and have points of connection with the Tanḥuma homilies. The passages were probably added at an early date, since they are not entirely missing in the older manuscripts, which are free from many other additions and glosses that are found in the present editions. In the concluding chapters the Bereshit Rabbah seems to have remained defective. In the parashiyot of the sidra Wayiggash the comment is no longer carried out verse by verse; the last parashah of this pericope, as well as the first of the sidra Wayeḥi, is probably drawn from Tanḥuma homilies; the comment to the whole 48th chapter of Genesis is missing in all the manuscripts (with one exception), and to verses 1-14 in the editions; the remaining portion of this sidra, the comment on Jacob's blessing (Gen. xlix.), is found in all the manuscripts—with the above-mentioned exceptions—in a revision showing later additions, a revision that was also used by the compiler of the Tanḥuma Midrash edited by Buber.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...ereshit-rabbah

نقرا من ENCYCLOPEDIA JUDAICA:
Nevertheless, the question of "exactly what a rabbinic redactor does with the material he is revising" can be determined only on the level of individual passages, and it is more than likely that in some cases the redactor of Genesis Rabbah reworked an earlier literary tradition which is preserved in a more original form in the Jerusalem Talmud, whereas in other cases the opposite may be the case.

This can be explained by positing that some of the aggadot and halakhot which occur in both Genesis Rabbah and the Jerusalem Talmud were derived from earlier common sources (perhaps from oral traditions). Alternatively, both Genesis Rabbah and the Jerusalem Talmud may have undergone successive revisions (as did the Babylonian Talmud), even after they took on a fairly distinct and identifiable literary form as redactional wholes, such that either one of them could have drawn upon a version of the other which differs in some respects from the works which we possess today

. Therefore the artificial linking of the important issue of the nature of rabbinic redactional revision of earlier literary sources to the broader (and far less significant) question of possible literary dependence of one or the other of these two finished and complete literary works on the other only leads to methodological and conceptual confusion.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/religio...genesis-rabbah

و كل هذا مع الاخذ بعين الاعتبار ان اقدم مخطوطتين لهذا المدراس ترجعان الى القرنين الحادي عشر و الثاني عشر !!! فلا يمكن حينها التاكد من صحة اصالة النص المدعى للاقتباس

نقرا من المصدر السابق :
This edition is one of the finest such works of modern rabbinic scholarship. It was begun by J. *Theodor in 1903 and completed in 1936 by Ḥ. *Albeck, who also wrote the introduction. From the numerous manuscripts at his disposal, Theodor chose

the London manuscript, written about the middle of the 12th century

. Careful examination of the manuscripts by Albeck, however, e

stablished the manuscript Vatican 30, copied in the 11th century, as superior.

The London manuscript is probably a later formulation of the same tradition recorded in the Vatican manuscript.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/religio...genesis-rabbah

2. الاختلافات الشاسعة بين النص المدعى للاقتباس و بين النص القراني :

النص المدراشي يتكلم عن رد الله عز وجل للملائكة بطريقة السؤال التقريري الذي يتضمن الحكمة من خلق اصناف معينة من الحيوانات و هي الثور و الخروف و السمك بينما النص القراني يتكلم عن تعليم الله عز وجل الاسماء لادم عليه الصلاة و السلام ثم عرضها على الملائكة و طلبه منهم ان يذكروا اسماءها ثم اجابتهم بتعظيم الله عز وجل و اقرارهم بعدم العلم الا ما علمه الله عز وجل لهم

.

ثانيا : مدراش تحليم

:
النص المدعى للاقتباس :
نقرا من مدراش تحليم الفصل الثامن :
"The LORD is our Master, how mighty is Your Name in all the earth." Rav said: "We find three places where the angels prosecuted God; the creation of man, the tabernacle, and the giving of the Torah." Where do we find [this phenomenon] regarding man? When God wished to create man he consulted the angels as it says (Genesis 1:26) "Let Us make man." They began to say "What is man that you recall him?!" [God] replied " Tomorrow you'll see how smart he is." When He created man what did God do? He brought all animals before the angels and asked them the names of all the animals and they did not know. God said to them "Do you want to know the wisdom of Man? I will ask him and he will tell me what all their names." What did God do? He brought all the animals and birds before Adam as it says (ibid. 2:19) "And the LORD formed from the earth." Rabbi Acha said, Did it not already say (ibid. 1:25) "And God made the beasts of the land?" What does the word "and He formed" come to teach us? Rather there it says "and He made" i.e. created them and here it says יצר from the root that connotes convergence as in (Deuteronomy 20:19) "when you besiege a city. (Genesis 2:19) "And He came to Adam to see what to call them" Isn't God omniscient? Rather "to see" means "to show the angels Adam's wisdom [by showing what Adam would call them]," and Adam independently came up with the same name as God for each and every animal.

https://www.sefaria.org/Midrash_Tehillim.8.2?lang=bi

دعوى الاقتباس مردودة لسببين:

1. مدراش تحليم يرجع بداية تالفيه في القرن الحادي عشر الميلادي فهو اذا متاخر عن الاسلام و حسب قول النقاد فان المدراش كان عبر العصور كالكتاب المفتوح فقد احتوى على عدد كبير من الاضافات بل و ان اقدم مخطوطاتها المتوفرة حاليا ترجع للقرن السادس عشر و هي مخطوطة القسطنطنية

:

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ECYCLOPEDIA:

Haggadic midrash, known since the eleventh century, when it was quoted by Nathan of Rome in his "'Aruk" (s.v. ), by R. Isaac b. Judah ibn Ghayyat in his "Halakot" (1b), and by Rashi in his commentary on I Sam. xvii. 49, and on many other passages.

This midrash is called also "Agadat Tehillim" (Rashi on Deut. xxxiii. 7 and many other passages), or "Haggadat Tehillim" ("'Aruk," s.v. , and in six other passages). From the twelfth century it was called also "Shoḥer Ṭob" (see Midrash Tehillim, ed. Buber, Introduction, pp. 35 et seq.), because it begins with the verse Prov. xi. 29, "Shoḥer ṭob," etc.

The true midrash covers only Ps. i.-cxviii.; and this is all that is found either in the manuscripts or in the first edition (Constantinople, 1512).

In the second edition (Salonica, 1515) a supplement was added covering, with the exception of two psalms, Ps. cxix.-cl. The author of this supplement was probably R. Mattithiah Yiẓhari of Saragossa, who collected the scattered haggadot on Ps. cxix.-cl. from the Yalḳuṭ, adding comments of his own. Since there are in the Yalḳuṭ no haggadic interpretations of Ps. cxxiii. and cxxxi.,....
It has been said that the date of the redaction of the midrash can not be determined. Haggadic collections on the Psalms were made at a very early time, and are mentioned several times in the Talmudim and in Genesis Rabbah, e.g., Yer. Kil. ix. 32b; Yer. Ket. xii. 3, 35a; Gen. R. xxxiii. 2; Ḳid. 33a (comp. Rashi ad loc.).

But it can not possibly be assumed that the haggadah collections on the Psalms are identical with the present Midrash Tehillim, since the latter contains many elements of later date. It

can not be denied, however, that much material from those old collections is included in the present midrash. It must therefore be assumed that parts of the old collections had been preserved among the later haggadists. Then, when a midrash to the Psalms was undertaken together with the other midrashim, homilies and comments on single verses were collected from the most diverse sources, and were arranged together with the earlier haggadic material on the Psalms, following the sequence of the Psalms themselves.

In the course of time this collection was supplemented and enlarged by the additions of various collections and editors, until the Midrash Tehillim finally took its present form. Its definitive completion must, according to Zunz, be assigned to the last centuries of the period of the Geonim, without attempting to determine an exact date. But Zunz's assumption, that the midrash was compiled in Italy, can not be accepted

. The work was edited in Palestine, as appears from the language, style, and manner of haggadic interpretations. Nearly all the amoraim mentioned in it are Palestinians, and the few Babylonian amoraim referred to, e.g...

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...drash-tehillim

و نقرا من مقدمة مدراش تلحيم

Composed in Narbonne (c.1050 - c.1450 CE)

https://www.sefaria.org/Midrash_Tehillim?lang=bi

2. الاختلافات بين النص المدراشي و بين النص القراني :

النص المدراشي يتكلم عن اسماء الحيوانات و الطيور بينما النص القراني يتكلم عن اسماء كل شيء

النص المدراشي لا يتكلم عن تعليم الله عز وجل لادم عليه الصلاة و السلام بل عن ان ادم خلق متعلما بينما النص القراني يذكر ان الله عز وجل علم ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام

النص المدراشي لا يذكر تسبيح الملائكة لله عز وجل واقرارهم عليهم السلام له عز وجل بالعلم المطلق .

**محمد سني 1989** · 13-06-2019, 01:38

الجزء الرابع :اخذ الميثاق من ذرية ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام و الزيادة في عمر داود عليه الصلاة و السلام .

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

قال تعالى : (( وإذ أخذ ربك من بني آدم من ظهورهم ذريتهم وأشهدهم على أنفسهم ألست بربكم قالوا بلى شهدنا أن تقولوا يوم القيامة إنا كنا عن هذا غافلين ( الأعراف : 172 )))

و نقرا في سنن الترمذي الجزء الخامس كتاب تفسير القران باب و من سورة الاعراف
3076 حدثنا عبد بن حميد حدثنا أبو نعيم حدثنا هشام بن سعد عن زيد بن أسلم عن أبي صالح عن أبي هريرة قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم لما خلق الله آدم مسح ظهره فسقط من ظهره كل نسمة هو خالقها من ذريته إلى يوم القيامة وجعل بين عيني كل إنسان منهم وبيصا من نور ثم عرضهم على آدم فقال أي رب من هؤلاء قال هؤلاء ذريتك فرأى رجلا منهم فأعجبه وبيص ما بين عينيه فقال أي رب من هذا فقال هذا رجل من آخر الأمم من ذريتك يقال له داود فقال رب كم جعلت عمره قال ستين سنة قال أي رب زده من عمري أربعين سنة فلما قضي عمر آدم جاءه ملك الموت فقال أولم يبق من عمري أربعون سنة قال أولم تعطها ابنك داود قال فجحد آدم فجحدت ذريته ونسي آدم فنسيت ذريته وخطئ آدم فخطئت ذريته قال أبو عيسى هذا حديث حسن صحيح وقد روي من غير وجه عن أبي هريرة عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم

وقال الامام الالباني رحمه الله في السنة لابن ابي عاصم و معها ظلال الجنة الجزء الاول باب اخذ ربنا الميثاق من عباده :
(( 206- حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ كَاسِبٍ ثنا أَنَسُ بْنُ عِيَاضٍ عَنْ حَارِثِ بْنِ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ عَنْ سَعِيدٍ الْمَقْبُرِيِّ عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ أَنّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ:"لَمَّا خَلَقَ اللَّهُ آدَمَ وَنَفَخَ فِيهِ مِنْ رُوحِهِ قَالَ بِيَدِهِ وَهُمَا مَقْبُوضَتَانِ: خُذْ أَيَّهُمَا شِئْتَ يَا آدَمُ. فَقَالَ: يَمِينَ رَبِّي وَكِلْتَا يَدَاهُ يَمِينٌ مُبَارَكَةٌ ثُمَّ بَسَطَهَا فَإِذَا فِيهَا آدَمُ وَذُرِّيَّتُهُ وَإِذَا كُلُّ إِنْسَانٍ مِنْهُمْ عِنْدَهُ عمره مكتوب".
إسناده حسن رجاله ثقات رجال مسلم غير ابن كاسب واسمه يعقوب بن حميد ومضى مرارا والحارث بن عبد الرحمن هو ابن عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ سَعْدِ بْنِ أبي ذباب فيه كلام يسير لا ينحط به حذيثه عن مرتبة الحسن وقد جزم الذهبي في "ميزانه" بأنه ثقة. وقال الحافظ: صدوق يهم ولم يتفرد بهذا الحديث فإن له طريقين عن أبي هريرة تقدم آنفا أحدهما والآخر يأتي بعد تخريجه.
والحديث أخرجه ابن حبان 2082 والحاكم 1/64 وعنه البيهقي في "الأسماء" ص 324 من طريق أخرى عن الحارث به. قال الحاكم: صحيح على شرط مسلم ووافقه الذهبي, ثم قال الحاكم: وله شاهد صحيح. ثم ساقه من طريق أبي خالد الأحمر عَنْ دَاوُدَ بْنِ أَبِي هِنْدَ عَنِ الشَّعْبِيِّ عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وسلم نحوه. قلت: وهذا إسناد حسن وهو الثالث عن أبي هريرة. وله رابع من طريق هِشَامِ بْنِ سَعْدٍ عَنْ زَيْدِ بن أسلم عن أبي صالح عنه به. أخرجه ابن سعد 1/27-28 والترمذي 2/180-181 والحاكم 2/325 وقال: صحيح علي شرط مسلم ووافقه الذهبي. وقال الترمذي: هذا حديث صحيح وقد روي من غير وجه عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ.))

تذكر الاية الكريمة و الحديث مسح الله عز وجل ظهر ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام و اخراجه ذريته من ظهره و اعطاء ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام من عمره لداود عليه الصلاة و السلام و يدعي اعداء الاسلام اليوم من الملاحدة و المنصرين ان هذه القصة مقتبسة من كتب يهودية متاخرة و هي مجرد كتب تفسيرية تحتوي على الاساطير لا اقل و لا اكثر

و الحقيقة عكس ذلك اذ ان المتتبع للمصادر التي يدعون اقتباس القران هي في الحقيقة

مصادر بعد الاسلام (بعد القرن السابع)

و المصادر التي يدعي هؤلاء الاقتباس منها هي :

1. مدراش فرقي العازر
2. مدراش يلكوت .

وسنرد باذن الله على كل نقطة على حدة

اولا : مدراش فرقي العازر :

النص المدعى للاقتباس :
نقرا من مدراش فرقي العازر الفصل 19:
"For thou, O Lord, hast made me glad through thy work" (Ps. 92:4). Adam said: The Holy One, blessed be He, had made me glad and brought me into the garden of Eden, and showed me the place of the abode of the righteous in the garden of Eden, and He showed me the four kingdoms, their rule and their destruction; and He showed me David, the son of Jesse, and his dominion in the future that is to come. I took from my years seventy years and added them to his days, as it is said, "Thou wilt add days to the days of the king; his years shall be as many generations" (Ps. 61:6). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: Thou wilt add days to the days of (the king Messiah); I also will add to his years in the future which is to come, as though they were many generations, as it is said, "His years shall be as many generations" (ibid.). I have given to God praise, and song (lauding) His works, as it is said, "I will sing of the works of thy hands" (Ps. 92:4).

دعوى الاقتباس مردودة لعلتين :

1. مدراش فرقي العازر تم تاليفه بعد الاسلام فقيل في القرن التاسع وقيل في الثامن فالاقتباس اذا مستحيل هنا لانه متاخر عن الاسلام .

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية :
PIRḲE DE-RABBI ELI'EZER:
By: Joseph Jacobs, Schulim Ochser
Haggadicmidrashic work on Genesis, part of Exodus, and a few sentences of Numbers; ascribed to R. Eliezer b. Hyrcanus,

and composed in Italy shortly after 833. It is quoted immediately before the end of the twelfth century under the following titles

: Pirḳe Rabbi Eli'ezer ha-Gadol (Maimonides, "Moreh," ii., xxvi.); Pirḳe Rabbi Eli'ezer ben Hyrcanus ("Seder R. Amram," ed. Warsaw, 1865, p. 32a); Baraita de-Rabbi Eli'ezer("'Aruk," s.v. ; Rashi on Gen. xvii. 3; gloss to Rashi on Meg. 22b; David Ḳimḥi, "Shorashim," s.v. ); Haggadah de-Rabbi Eli'ezer ben Hyrcanus (R. Tam, in Tos. Ket. 99a).

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...rabbi-eli-ezer

بل على العكس فان هذا المدراش تاثر مؤلفه كثيرا بالاسلام و ليس العكس و حتى في القصص المتعلقة بادم عليه الصلاة و السلام

وذكرت الموسوعة اليهودية ذلك نقلا عن المستشرق زونز :
Another legend connects the building of the Kaaba with Abraham. When the time came for Adam to die, he had forgotten the gift of forty years to David, and had to be reminded of it by the Angel of Death. He is said to have been buried in the "Cave of Treasures"—a Christian, rather than a Jewish, idea.

Several of these peculiar features are found again in the Pirḳe de-Rabbi Eliezer, a work that was compiled under Arabic influence

(Zunz, "G. V." 2d ed., pp. 289 et seq.).

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/758-adam

و نقرا في مقدمة مدراش فرقي العازر :

Composed in Talmudic Israel/Babylon (c.630 - c.1030 CE)

. Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer (Chapters of Rabbi Eliezer) is an aggadic-midrashic work on the Torah containing exegesis and retellings of biblical stories. The composition enjoyed widespread circulation and recognition throughout Jewish history, and continues to do so in the present. Traditionally, it has been understood to be a tannaitic composition which originated with the tanna Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, - a disciple of Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakai and teacher of Rabbi Akiva - and his disciples.

However, modern scholarship has shown the book in fact a a medieval work from the 8th Century.

The work is divided into 54 chapters, which may be divided into seven groups. Pirke De-Rabbi Eliezer comprises exegesis, legends and folklore, as well as astronomical discussions related to the story of the Creation. The author dwells longest on the description of the second day of Creation, in which the Ma'aseh ha-Merkavah (Ezek. i.) is described in various forms.

https://www.sefaria.org/Pirkei_DeRabbi_Eliezer?lang=en

2.

الاختلافات الشاسعة بين النص المدعى للاقتباس و بين النص القراني:

النص المدراشي يذكر رؤية ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام لاربعة ممالك يتم تدميرها و هذا لا يوجد في نص الحديث الصحيح

النص المدراشي يتكلم عن زيادة في عمر ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام بمقدار سبعين سنة بينما سياق الحديث يتكلم عن زيادة بمقدار اربعين سنة

.

ثانيا : مدراش يلكوت

:
النص المدعى للاقتباس :
مدراش يلكوت الفصل 41:
Another thing, the Book of Adam's Descendants was passed before him. He saw David's portion of life would be three hours. He said, "Master of the world, this should not be decreed! A thought has come to me."
..He [Adam] said to him, "How many are my
years?"
....God said, "1,000 years."
Adam said, "Can I give some as a gift?"
"God said, "Yes."
Adam said, "I will give him 70 years to be his fate."
What did Adam do? He brought a contract and wrote on it a contract of gift; and it was executed by God, Metatron, and Adam.
Adam said, "Master of the World, good looks are his, kingship, and songs of praise have I given him in my gift of 70 years of his life; and he will sing before you. And this is written where it says "behold I have come" in the book I have written [Tehillim 92].

https://www.sefaria.org/Yalkut_Shimo...rah.42?lang=bi

دعوى الاقتباس مردودة لعلتين :

1. مدراش يلكوت تم تالفيه بعد الاسلام فقيل ان زمن كتابته يرجع الى القرن الحادي عشر و قيل الثاني عشر و قيل الثالث عشر:

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA

The author of the Yalḳuṭ can not be determined with certainty.

The title-page of the Venice edition ascribes the composition of the work to R. Simeon of Frankfort, "the chief of exegetes" ("rosh ha-darshanim"), and this was accepted by Conforte and Azulai, who called him Simeon Ashkenazi of Frankfort. Rapoport (in "Kerem Ḥemed," vii. 7 et seq.),

on the other hand, maintained that R. Simeon (the father of R. Joseph Ḳara), who flourished in the eleventh century, was its author

; but this assertion is untenable since the compiler of the Yalḳuṭ used midrashim of a later date. If the Yalḳuṭ was so old, moreover, it would be difficult to explain why no mention of it is made by R. Nathan b. Jehiel, the author of the "'Aruk," or by Rashi. All the proofs advanced by Rapoport have been refuted by Epstein,

who inclines to agree with Zunz that the author of the Yalḳuṭ flourished in the early part of the thirteenth century

. According to Zunz, the work was written by R. Simeon Ḳara, who lived in southern Germany at that period, and the title "ha-Darshan" was bestowed upon him probably at a later date

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/15057-yalkut

و نقرا من مقدمة مدراش يلكوت :

Composed in (1100 CE)

. The Yalkut Shimoni (Gathering of Simon) or simply Yalkut is an aggadic (homiletic) compilation on the books of the Tanakh. From such older aggadot as were accessible to him, the author collected various interpretations and explanations of Biblical passages, and arranged these according to the sequence of those portions of the Bible to which they referred. The work is divided into sections, the first part deals with the Torah (first five books of the Tanakh).

https://www.sefaria.org/Yalkut_Shimoni_on_Torah?lang=bi

2. الاختلافات الشاسعة بين النص المدراشي و نص الحديث الصحيح :

النص المدراشي يذكر ان الذي ابرم الاتفاق بين الله عز وجل و بين ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام هو الملاك متاتترون بينما سياق الحديث لا يذكر شيئا من هذا بل هو طلب طلبه ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام من الله عز وجل و اجابه الى ذلك ربه جل جلاله

النص المدراشي يتكلم عن سبعين سنة بينما سياق الحديث يذكر اربعين سنة

النص المدراشي يذكر ان ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام راى ان داود عليه الصلاة و السلام في البداية لم يملك اكثر من ثلاث ساعات و هذا غير موجود في سياق الحديث

.

**محمد سني 1989** · 13-06-2019, 01:41

الجزء الخامس :خلق الله لادم من قبضة قبضها من جميع الارض .

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

نقرا في سنن الترمذي الجزء الخامس كتاب تفسير القران باب ومن سورة البقرة 2955 حدثنا محمد بن بشار حدثنا يحيى بن سعيد وابن أبي عدي ومحمد بن جعفر وعبد الوهاب قالوا حدثنا عوف بن أبي جميلة الأعرابي عن قسامة بن زهير عن أبي موسى الأشعري قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إن الله تعالى خلق آدم من قبضة قبضها من جميع الأرض فجاء بنو آدم على قدر الأرض فجاء منهم الأحمر والأبيض والأسود وبين ذلك والسهل والحزن والخبيث والطيب قال أبو عيسى هذا حديث حسن صحيح

تحقيق الألباني:
صحيح، المشكاة (100) ، الصحيحة (1630)

يدعي اعداء الاسلام اليوم من الملاحدة و المنصرين ان كيفية خلق ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام كما في الحديث الصحيح اعلاه مقتبس من كتب يهودية متاخرة و هي مجرد كتب تفسيرية تحتوي على الاساطير لا اقل و لا اكثر

و الحقيقة عكس ذلك اذ ان المتتبع للمصادر التي يدعون اقتباس القران منها لا تخلو ان تكون احد ثلاثة :

1. مصادر بعد الاسلام (بعد القرن السابع)

2. مصادر جمعت بشكل اولي قبل الاسلام بزمن بسيط و لكنها تعرضت لاضافات و تنقيحات كثيرة لقرون امتدت الى فترة ما بعد الاسلام

3. مصادر قبل الاسلام بقرون طويلة تمتد الى فترة ما قبل المسيح عليه الصلاة و السلام ويصل تراثها الشفهي الى زمان ابعد من ذلك

.

و المصادر التي يدعي هؤلاء الاقتباس منها هي :

1. مدراش فرقي العازر

2. ترجوم يوناثان لسفر التكوين

3. سفر اخنوخ الثاني (المعروف بالترجمة السلافية لسفر اخنوخ)

4. كتاب Chronicles of Jerahmeel
5. التلمود

.

وسنرد باذن الله على كل نقطة على حدة

اولا : مدراش فرقي العازر

النص المدعى للاقتباس :
مدراش فرقي العازر الفصل الحادي عشر :
He began to collect the dust of the first man from the four corners of the world; red, black, white, and "pale green," (which) refers to the body.
Why (did He gather man's dust) from the four corners of the world? Thus spake the Holy One, blessed be He: If a man should come from the east to the west, or from the west to the east, and his time comes to depart from the world, then the earth shall not say, The dust of thy body is not mine, return to the place whence thou wast created. But (this circumstance) teaches thee that in every place where a man goes or comes, and his end approaches when he must depart from the world, thence is the dust of his body, and there it returns to the dust, as it is said, "For dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return" (Gen. 3:19).

https://www.sefaria.org/Pirkei_DeRab...r.11.6?lang=en

دعوى الاقتباس مردودة لعلتين :

1. مدراش فرقي العازر تم تاليفه بعد الاسلام فقيل في القرن التاسع وقيل في الثامن فالاقتباس اذا مستحيل هنا لانه متاخر عن الاسلام

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية :
PIRḲE DE-RABBI ELI'EZER:
By: Joseph Jacobs, Schulim Ochser
Haggadicmidrashic work on Genesis, part of Exodus, and a few sentences of Numbers; ascribed to R. Eliezer b. Hyrcanus,

and composed in Italy shortly after 833. It is quoted immediately before the end of the twelfth century

under the following titles: Pirḳe Rabbi Eli'ezer ha-Gadol (Maimonides, "Moreh," ii., xxvi.); Pirḳe Rabbi Eli'ezer ben Hyrcanus ("Seder R. Amram," ed. Warsaw, 1865, p. 32a); Baraita de-Rabbi Eli'ezer("'Aruk," s.v. ; Rashi on Gen. xvii. 3; gloss to Rashi on Meg. 22b; David Ḳimḥi, "Shorashim," s.v. ); Haggadah de-Rabbi Eli'ezer ben Hyrcanus (R. Tam, in Tos. Ket. 99a).

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...rabbi-eli-ezer

بل على العكس فان هذا المدراش تاثر مؤلفه كثيرا بالاسلام و ليس العكس و حتى في القصص المتعلقة بادم عليه الصلاة و السلام

وذكرت الموسوعة اليهودية ذلك نقلا عن المستشرق زونز :
Another legend connects the building of the Kaaba with Abraham. When the time came for Adam to die, he had forgotten the gift of forty years to David, and had to be reminded of it by the Angel of Death. He is said to have been buried in the "Cave of Treasures"—a Christian, rather than a Jewish, idea.

Several of these peculiar features are found again in the Pirḳe de-Rabbi Eliezer, a work that was compiled under Arabic influence

(Zunz, "G. V." 2d ed., pp. 289 et seq.).

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/758-adam

و نقرا في مقدمة مدراش فرقي العازر :
Composed in Talmudic Israel/Babylon (c.630 - c.1030 CE). Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer (Chapters of Rabbi Eliezer) is an aggadic-midrashic work on the Torah containing exegesis and retellings of biblical stories. The composition enjoyed widespread circulation and recognition throughout Jewish history, and continues to do so in the present. Traditionally, it has been understood to be a tannaitic composition which originated with the tanna Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, - a disciple of Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakai and teacher of Rabbi Akiva - and his disciples.

However, modern scholarship has shown the book in fact a a medieval work from the 8th Century

. The work is divided into 54 chapters, which may be divided into seven groups. Pirke De-Rabbi Eliezer comprises exegesis, legends and folklore, as well as astronomical discussions related to the story of the Creation. The author dwells longest on the description of the second day of Creation, in which the Ma'aseh ha-Merkavah (Ezek. i.) is described in various forms.

https://www.sefaria.org/Pirkei_DeRabbi_Eliezer?lang=en

2. الاختلافات بين نص الحديث الصحيح وبين نص المدراش :

نص المدراش يتكلم عن ان التراب الذي خلق منه ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام ماخوذ من اركان الارض الاربعة !!!! بينما نص الحديث الصحيح يصرح ان خلق ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام كان من قبضة قبضها الله عز وجل (على ما يليق بجلاله و عظمته من غير تعطيل و لا تاويل و لا تشبيه) من جميع الارض

.

ثانيا : ترجوم يوناثان لسفر التكوين :

النص المدعى للاقتباس :
نقرا في ترجوم يوناثان لسفر التكوين الاصحاح الثاني :
And the Lord God created man in two formations; and took dust from the place of the house of the sanctuary, and from the four winds of the world, and mixed from all the waters of the world, and created him red, black, and white; and breathed into his nostrils the inspiration of life, and there was in the body of Adam the inspiration of a speaking spirit, unto the illumination of the eyes and the hearing of the ears.

https://www.sefaria.org/Targum_Jonat...is.2.7?lang=en

دعوى الاقتباس مردودة لعلتين :

1. ترجوم يوناثان لسفر التكوين تم تالفيه بشكل مؤكد بعد ظهور الاسلام (قيل بعد القرن الحادي عشر وقيل في القرن الرابع عشر) و يدل على هذا انه يحتوي على اسماء عربية كفاطمة !

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA:
. If there is a tradition among them [the Palestinians] that it has been made the subject of public discourse since the days of the ancient sages [here follow the names of Palestinian amoraim of the third and fourth centuries], it must be held in the same esteem as our Targum; for otherwise they would not have allowed it. But if it is less ancient, it is not authoritative. It is very improbable, however, in our opinion, that it is of later origin" (comp. "R. E. J." xlii. 235). The following statement is quoted ("Kol Bo," § 37) in the name of R. Meïr of Rothenburg (13th cent.) with reference to the Targum: "Strictly speaking, we should recite the weekly section with the Targum Yerushalmi, since it explains the Hebrew text in fuller detail than does our Targum; but we do not possess it, and we follow,

moreover, the custom of the Babylonians." Both these statements indicate that the Palestinian Targum was rarely found in the Middle Ages, although it was frequently quoted after the eleventh century

(see Zunz, "G. V." pp. 66 et seq.), especially in the "'Aruk" of Nathan b. Jehiel, which explains many words found in it

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14248-targum

و نقرا من ENCYCLOPEDIA JUDAICA:
Targum Jonathan is the Targum to the prophetic books, and Targum Yerushalmi is a largely midrashic translation (or interpretation) of the Hagiographa.

Targum Pseudo-Jonathan is a late targum on the whole Pentateuch (Genesis 15. 14 mentions the wives of Muḥammad as the wives of Ishmael)

, but preserving the earlier interpretations. Several fragmentary targumim (pl.) have survived, together with an early form of the Palestinian targum tradition in Neofiti I. From all this it is clear that there was a relatively stable, though developing, targum tradition, which is unsurprising, given the connection between targumim and synagogues.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/philoso...general/targum

و نقرا من مقدمة ترجوم يوناثان لسفر التكوين :
Composed in Talmudic Israel (c.150 - c.250 CE). Targum Pseudo-Jonathan is a western targum (translation) of the Torah (Pentateuch) from the land of Israel (as opposed to the eastern Babylonian Targum Onkelos). Its correct title was originally Targum Yerushalmi (Jerusalem Targum), which is how it was known in medieval times. But because of a printer's mistake it was later labeled Targum Jonathan, in reference to Jonathan ben Uzziel. Some editions of the Pentateuch continue to call it Targum Jonathan to this day. Most scholars refer to the text as Targum Pseudo-Jonathan. This targum is more than a mere translation. It includes much Aggadic material collected from various sources as late as the Midrash Rabbah as well as earlier material from the Talmud. It is effectively a combination of a commentary and a translation. In the portions where it is pure translation, it often agrees with the Targum Onkelos.

The date of its composition is disputed. It cannot have been completed before the Arabic conquest as it refers to Mohammad's wife Fatimah, but might have been initially composed in the 4th Century CE. However, some scholars date it in the 14th Century.

https://www.sefaria.org/Targum_Jonathan_on_Genesis?lang=en

نقرا من قاموس الكتاب المقدس :
((فوائد الترجومات:لا أهمية مطلقًا للترجومات في تحقيق النصوص، حيث أنها في معظمها ترجمات توضيحية وليست ترجمات مباشرة. ولكن للترجومات أهميتها من جهة بعض التفسيرات اليهودية في القرون التي أعقبت زمن المسيح.

ولكن يقلل من هذه الأهمية أن معظمهما يشتمل على إضافات كثيرة أو تغيرات حدثت في أزمنة متأخرة، فيحتوي الترجوم الفلسطيني مثلا على إشارة واضحة محددة إلى مدينة القسطنطينية التي لم تؤسس إلا في 325 م. كما أنه ينسب إلى إسماعيل زوجة وابنة بأسماء من القرن السابع الميلادي

. ولكن أحياناً يعطينا الترجوم المعنى الدقيق لكلمة عبرية نادرة كانت تستخدم في أوائل العصر المسيحي، وإن كان ذلك يستلزم حرصا شديدا))

https://st-takla.org/Full-Free-Copti...nslations.html

2. الاختلافات بين نص الحديث الصحيح و بين نص ترجوم يناثان لسفر التكوين :

نص الترجوم يتكلم عن اخذ التراب من مكان الهيكل المقدس و من اركان الارض الاربعة !!! بينما نص الحديث يذكر ان الله عز وجل خلق ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام بقبضة قبضها (على ما يليق بجلاله و عظمته من غير تاويل او تعطيل او تشبيه ) من جميع انحاء الارض

.

ثالثا :سفر اخنوخ الثاني (الترجمة السلافية لسفر اخنوخ) .

النص المدعى للاقتباس :
نقرا من سفر اخنوخ الثاني الاصحاح الثلاثون
10 [Friday]. On the sixth day I commanded my wisdom to create man from seven consistencies: one, his flesh from the earth; two, his blood from the dew; three, his eyes from the sun; four, his bones from stone; five, his intelligence from the swiftness of the angels and from cloud; six, his veins and his hair from the grass of the earth; seven, his soul from my breath and from the wind.

https://www.pseudepigrapha.com/pseude...ha/enochs2.htm

دعوى الاقتباس مردودة لعلتين :

1. سفر اخنوخ الثاني متاخر عن الاسلام حيث يرجع هذا العمل الى القرن العاشر او الحادي عشر

نقرا من ECYCLOPEDIA OF JUDAICA:
ENOCH, SLAVONIC BOOK OF (known as ii Enoch ; abbr. ii En. ; also entitled the Book of the Secrets of Enoch , or several variations on this),

apocryphal work translated in the tenth or 11th century from Greek into Slavonic

. The dating is deduced from the evidence of certain linguistic peculiarities. The first complete edition of the work was published by A. Popov in 1880. It was edited and studied by M. Sokolov (1899 and 1910) who made a special examination of the quotations from Old Russian literature it contains. An edition and translation of the work into French was made by A. Vaillant (1952). There are considerable differences between the two recensions (one long and one short) found in the manuscripts.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/religio...-slavonic-book

2. الاختلافات بين نص الحديث الصحيح و بين نص سفر اخنوخ الثاني :

نص سفر اخنوخ الثاني يختلف جذريا عن نص الحديث الصحيح فالنص قسم جسم ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام الى سبعة اجزاء و كل جزء خلقه الله عز وجل من مصدر معين حسب نص السفر و الارض او (تراب الارض) محصور هنا فقط على خلق لحم ادم بينما دمه و عيناه و عظامه و اوعية دمه و كذلك ذكاؤه كلها من مصادر مختلفة . اما نص الحديث الصحيح فانما يتكلم عن خلق جسم ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام كله من قبضة قبضها الله عز وجل (على ما يليق بجلاله و عظمته من غير تاويل و لا تعطيل و لا تشبيه) من جميع انحاء الارض

.

رابعا : كتاب Chronicles of Jerahmeel :

النص المدعى للاقتباس :
نقرا من نفس الكتاب الجزء السادس الصفحة 16 :
God then called Gabriel, and said unto him: 'Go and bring Me dust from the four corners of the earth, and I will create man out of it.' Gabriel then went to gather dust from the earth, but the earth drove him away and would not allow him to take dust from it. Gabriel thereupon said: 'Why, O
earth, dost thou not hearken to the voice of thy Lord, who founded thee upon the waters without props and without pillars?' The earth replied, and said: 'I am destined to become a curse, and to be cursed through man, and if God Himself does not take the dust from me, no one else shall ever do so.' (7) When God saw this He stretched forth His hand, took of the dust, and created therewith the first man on the sixth day. God created the matter of man in four colours, white, black, red and green. The bones and the sinews are white, the intestines black, the blood red, and the skin of the body green (livid). When the soul departs from the body, the body immediately becomes livid. (

https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/coj/coj010.htm

دعوى الاقتباس مردودة لعلتين :

1. هذا الكتاب تم تاليفه في القرن الرابع عشر الميلادي اي بعد سبع قرون من ظهور الاسلام !! فهو متاخر جدا !!!

نقرا من مقدمة الكتاب الصفحة 21 :
. I had the whole manuscript copied out, with a view to its ultimate publication, in 1888. And now the first part of it, dealing with Scripture history from the Creation down to the death of Judas Maccabeus, forms the present publication.

The compilation of the manuscript is due to a certain Eleasar ben Asher the Levite, who lived at the beginning of the fourteenth century somewhere in the Rhine Provinces, and whose preface I have reproduced as faithfully as possible

. In it he states that he has collected the books from far and wide, and combined them into one consecutive whole, fully conscious of the fact that no such book had ever been prepared before, and charging his children with the faithful preservation of this record of his labours of many years, continued under great stress and with great difficulties.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/coj/coj003.htm

2. الاختلافات بين نص الحديث الصحيح و بين ما هو موجود في كتاب Chronicles of Jerahmeel:

نص الكتاب يتكلم ان الله عز وجل في بادئ الامر بعث جبريل عليه السلام لياتيه بالتراب من اركان الارض الاربعة و لكن الارض رفضت جيريل عليه السلام!!! و هذا ليس له وجود في نص الحديث الصحيح

نص الكتاب يذكر حوارا دار بين جيريل عليه السلام و بين الارض بعد رفض الارض ان ياخئ جبريل عليه السلام منها التراب الذي سيخلق منه ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام !!! وهذا غير موجود في نص الحديث الصحيح

نص الكتاب يتكلم عن حكمة اخذ التراب من اركان الارض الاربعة الا و هو خلق اجزاء جسم ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام المختلفة بالوان مختلفة فالتراب الابيض خلقت منه العظام البيضاء و التراب الاحمر خلق منه الدم الاحمر و التراب الاسود خلقت منه الاعضاء الداخلية و التراب الاخضر خلق منه الجلد !! بينما نص الحديث الصحيح يتكلم عن الحكمة او احد الحكم من خلق الله عز وجل ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام من قبضة من تراب قبضها من جميع انحاء الارض (على ما يليق بجلاله و عظمته من غير تعطيل و لا تاويل و لا تشبيه) الا وهي خلق اصناف البشر باختلاف الوانهم فمنهم الابيض و منهم الاسود و منهم الاحمر و باختلاف طبائعهم ايضا فمنهم الخبيث و منهم الطيب و منهم الحزن و السهل

.

خامسا : التلمود

النص المدعى للاقتباس:
نقرا من تلمود سنهدرين 38a :
It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir would say: The dust that served to form Adam the first man was gathered from the entire world, as it is stated: “When I was made in secret and wrought in the lowest places of the earth, Your eyes did see my unshaped flesh” (Psalms 139:15–16), and it is written: “For the eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth” (II Chronicles 16:9), indicating that this figure was formed from the whole earth, the place within the view of the Lord’s eyes. Rav Oshaya says in the name of Rav: With regard to Adam the first man
38bhis torso was fashioned from dust taken from Babylonia, and his head was fashioned from dust taken from Eretz Yisrael, the most important land, and his limbs were fashioned from dust taken from the rest of the lands in the world.

https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.38b?lang=en

و للرد نقول :

اولا : ان دعوى الاقتباس هنا قائمة على اساس باطل الا و هي دعوى ان التلمود كله باطل و مجرد عمل متاخر يحتوي على الخرافات و الحقيقة هي ان التلمود و ان بدا تدوينه في القرن الثاني الميلادي الا انه تجميع لتراث شفهي يرجع بعضه الى زمن السبي او حتى ما قبل السبي بقول النقاد
و تتضح اهميته الجلية عند اليهود في اطلاقهم عليه تسمية " التوراة الشفهية" فالتلمود عندهم يعتبر اهم المصادر بعد التناخ (العهد القديم) حيث يضم المشناة و الهاجاداه و يعتبر عندهم بقية علوم الانبياء التي لم يتم تدوينها في اسفار العهد القديم و تم تناقلها شفهيا .
بمعنى اخر يمكننا ان نقول ان التلمود يمثل التراث الشفهي اليهودي الممتد من فترة السبي و ما قبله الى قرون تالية

.

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA:

As early as the third century Joshua ben Levi interpreted Deut. ix. 10 to mean that the entire Law, including Miḳra, Mishnah, Talmud, and Haggadah, had been revealed to Moses on Sinai

(Yer. Pes. 17a, line 59; Meg. 74d, 25), while in Gen. R. lxvi. 3 the blessings invoked in Gen. xxvii. 28 are explained as "Miḳra, Mishnah, Talmud, and Haggadah." The Palestinian haggadist Isaac divided these four branches into two groups: (1) the Miḳra and the Haggadah, dealing with subjects of general interest; and (2) the Mishnah and the Talmud, "which can not hold the attention of those who hear them" (Pesiḳ. 101b; see Bacher, "Ag. Pal. Amor." ii. 211)
....

The history of the origin of the Talmud is the same as that of the Mishnah—a tradition, transmitted orally for centuries

, was finally cast into definite literary form, although from the moment in which the Talmud became the chief subject of study in the academies it had a double existence, and was accordingly, in its final stage, redacted in two different forms. The Mishnah of Judah I. was adopted simultaneously in Babylon and Palestine as the halakic collection par excellence; and at the same time the development of the Talmud was begun both at Sepphoris, where the Mishnah was redacted, and at Nehardea and Sura, where Judah's pupils Samuel and Rab engaged in their epoch-making work. The academies of Babylon and of Palestine alike regarded the study of the Mishnah and its interpretation as their chief task. The Amoraim, as the directors and members of these academies were called ( see Amora), became the originators of the Talmud; and its final redaction marked the end of the amoraic times in the same way that the period of the Tannaim was concluded by the compilation of the Mishnah of Judah I. Like the Mishnah, the Talmud was not the work of one author or of several authors, but was the result of the collective labors of many successive generations, whose toil finally resulted in a book unique in its mode of development.
......
After the completion of the Talmud as a work of literature, it exercised a twofold influence as a historical factor in the history of Judaism and its followers, not only in regard to the guidance and formulation of religious life and thought, but also with respect to the awakening and development of intellectual activity.

As a document of religion the Talmud acquired that authority which was due to it as the written embodiment of the ancient tradition, and it fulfilled the task which the men of the Great Assembly set for the representatives of the tradition when they said, "Make a hedge for the Torah" (Ab. i. 2). Those who professed Judaism felt no doubt that the Talmud was equal to the Bible as a source of instruction and decision in problems of religion, and every effort to set forth religious teachings and duties was based on it

; so that even the great systematic treatise of Maimonides, which was intended to supersede the Talmud, only led to a more thorough study of it. In like manner

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14213-talmud

ثانيا : الجزم بالاقتباس باطل لان تدوين التلمود لم يتم على مرحلة واحدة قبل الاسلام بل امتد تدوينه لقرون طويلة على مدى اجيال اشرف على جمعه عدد من الكتاب و تعرض لبعض التنقيحات على مدى قرون :

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA :

The date at which the Talmud was committed to writing is purely conjectural. The work itself contains neither statements nor allusions to show that any complete or partial copy of the work redacted and completed by Ashi and Rabina had been made in their days;

and the same lack of information characterizes both Yerushalmi and the Mishnah (the basis of both the Talmudim), as well as the other works of the tannaitic period. There are, however, allusions, although they are only sporadic, which show that the Halakah and the Haggadah were committed to writing; for copies were described as being in the possession of individual scholars, who were occasionally criticized for owning them. This censure was based on an interdiction issued in the third century, which forbade any one to commit the teachings of tradition to writing or to use a manuscript of such a character in lecturing (see Giṭ. 60a; Tem. 14b).

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14213-talmud

و هذا يعني ان جمع التلمود في كتاب واحد بدا مع الحبر اشي في القرن الرابع ثم الحبر رابي في بداية القرن الخامس الميلادي

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA :
ASHI:
By: Marcus Jastrow, Wilhelm Bacher

A celebrated Babylonian amora; born 352; died 427; reestablished the academy at Sura, and was the first editor of the Babylonian Talmud

. According to a tradition preserved in the academies (Ḳid. 72b), Ashi was born in the same year that Raba, the great teacher of MaḦuza, died, and he was the first teacher of any importance in the Babylonian colleges after Raba's death.
When Ashi undertook the final redaction of the Talmud he evidently had at his disposal notes of this kind, although Brüll (l.c. p. 18) is probably correct in ascribing to Rabina the first complete written copy of the Talmud; Rabina had as collaborators many of the Saboraim, to whom an ancient and incontrovertible tradition assigns numerous additions to the Talmudic text.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/1945-ashi

و نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA:
RABINA I.:
By: Wilhelm Bacher, Jacob Zallel Lauterbach

Babylonian amora of the fifth generation; died about 420

. He was a pupil of Raba b. Joseph b. Ḥama, and his extreme youthfulness at that time is shown by the fact that his teacher designated him and Ḥama b. Bisa as "dardeḳi" (children; B. B. 16b).....
When R. Ashi became director of the Academy of Sura (or Matah Meḥasya), Rabina became a student there, although he was at least as old as Ashi—perhaps even a few years older; however, he was rather the associate of Ashi ("talmid ḥaber") than his pupil ('Er. 63a).

Next to Ashi, Rabina had the greatest share in the redaction of the Talmud undertaken by Ashi and his colleagues

. Rabina died seven years before Ashi.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...12505-rabina-i

الا ان ما كتبوه تمت الاضافة اليه و التعديل عليه اكثر من مرة فالحبر رابينا اضاف و نقح بعضا مما كتبه الحبر اشي ثم مع توالي الاجيال جاءت تعديلات و اضافات اكثر

نقرا في الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA :
The academies of Babylon and of Palestine alike regarded the study of the Mishnah and its interpretation as their chief task.

The Amoraim, as the directors and members of these academies were called ( see Amora), became the originators of the Talmud; and its final redaction marked the end of the amoraic times in the same way that the period of the Tannaim was concluded by the compilation of the Mishnah of Judah I. Like the Mishnah, the Talmud was not the work of one author or of several authors, but was the result of the collective labors of many successive generations, whose toil finally resulted in a book unique in its mode of development.

.

.....
. When Ashi undertook the final redaction of the Talmud he evidently had at his disposal notes of this kind, although Brüll (l.c. p. 18) is probably correct in ascribing to Rabina the first complete written copy of the Talmud;

Rabina had as collaborators many of the Saboraim, to whom an ancient and incontrovertible tradition assigns numerous additions to the Talmudic text.

No Formal Ratification.
When Rabina died a written text of the Talmud was already in existence

, the material contributed by the Saboraim being merely additions; although in thus extending the text they simply continued what had been done since the first redaction of the Talmud by Ashi

. The Saboraim, however, confined themselves to additions of a certain form which made no change whatsoever in the text as determined by them under the direction of Rabina (on these saboraic additions as well as on other accretions in Babli, see the statements by Brüll, l.c. pp. 69-86).

Yet there is no allusion whatever to a formal sanction of the written text of the Talmud; for neither did such a ratification take place nor was a formal one at all necessary. The Babylonian academies, which produced the text in the course of 300 years, remained its guardians when it was reduced to writing; and it became authoritative in virtue of its acceptance by the successors of the Amoraim,

as the Mishnah had been sanctioned by the latter and was made the chief subject of study, thus becoming a basis for halakic decisions. The traditions, however, underwent no further development; for the "horayot," or the independent exegesis of the Mishnah and the halakic decisions based on this exegesis, ceased with Ashi and Rabina, and thus with the completion of the Talmud, as is stated in the canon incorporated in the Talmud itself (B. M. 86a). The Mishnah, the basal work of halakic tradition, thenceforth shared its authority with the Talmud.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14213-talmud

ثالثا : الجزم بالاقتباس باطل هنا نظرا لعدم توفر اي مخطوطة للتلمود اليوم يعود تاريخها لما قبل الاسلام

.

نقرا في الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA :
Earliest Manuscript of the Babli.
In the editions the Babylonian Talmud is so arranged that each paragraph of the Mishnah is followed by the portion of the Talmud which forms the commentary on it; the portions are frequently divided into sections, rubricked by the successive sentences of the mishnaic paragraph on which they are based, although an entire paragraph occasionally serves as a single text. Thus Babli on Ket. ii. 1 (16a-18b) is divided into six sections; but there is no division into sections for ii. 2 (18b-20b), ii. 3 (20b-22a), ii. 5 (23b), and ii. 9 (27b-28a). There are three sections for ii. 4 (23a); two for ii. 6 (23b-26a), ii. 7 (26b-27a), and ii. 8 (27a, b); and eight for ii. 10 (28a, b).

In the Munich codex, which is based on a manuscript of the middle of the ninth century (see Lewy in "Breslauer Jahresbericht," 1905, p. 28)

, the text of the entire chapter of the Mishnah is written in large characters on the inner portion of the page, separated from the Talmudic text, which is in a different script. In the fragments in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, written in 1123 and containing a portion of the treatise Keritot (see "J. Q. R." ix. 145), each chapter is headed by the entire mishnaic text on which it is based

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14213-talmud

فاقدم مخطوطة للتلمود عندنا هي مخطوطة ميونخ و التي هي في الاصل نسخت من مخطوطة اخرى في منتصف القرن التاسع
وقد تم نسخ مخطوطة ميونخ في القرن الرابع عشر الميلادي
نقرا من FREDBERG JEWISH MANUSCRIPT SOCIETY:

Between the years 1342 and 1343 Shlomo ben Shimshon copied by hand the complete Babylonian Talmud in one volume containing 577 pages.

Thetype of script Shlomo ben Shimshon used was not the elegant square script commonly used for writing canonical treatises, but a middling script—that enabled a denser and more massive script and with which the copyist was able to include all 37 tractates of the Talmud in addition to the Mishna in a single volume. Apparently, Shlomo ben Shimshon’s achievement is unprecedented—not only for being the only volume of the Babylonian Talmud preserved in manuscript, but primarily for being the only one created from the outset as a single volume. Over the generations, the manuscript made its way across Europe, passing among various owners who left their signatures in the body of the manuscript. We do not know the name of its original owner since his name was erased by one of the manuscript’s later owners. Various hypotheses have been raised about its whereabouts in the intervening centuries, but what is certain is that some time during the nineteenth century this volume, along and other religious manuscripts, were collected from a German church and placed in the Munich State Library, hence its name—The Munich Manuscript.

https://web.nli.org.il/sites/nlis/en/...munich_95.aspx

رابعا : دعوى الاقتباس (من يهود الجزيرة ********* مردودة هنا نظرا لاختلاف البيئة اليهودية في الجزيرة العربية عن تلك الموجودة خارج الجزيرة العربية من جهة الثقافة الدينية و الاجتماعية

فقد ذكر بعض النقاد ان يهود الجزيرة العربية تميزوا بعدة امور تفصلهم عن يهود الشام و العراق و مصر :

اولا : الانعزالية الاجتماعية و البعد الجغرافي عن بقية يهود العالم مما جعل يهود الجزيرة العربية شبه منقطعين عن بقية يهود العالم و لا يربطهم الا مسمى الديانة و رابطة الدم

ثانيا : ضحالة العلم الديني لدى يهود الجزيرة العربية مقارنة ببقية يهود العالم

.

و مما يدل على هذا ما نقرؤه في كتاب تاريخ اليهود في بلاد العرب الصفحة 11 -12:

file:///Users/MacbookPro/Downloads/مكتبة نور - تاريخ اليهود في بلاد العرب في الجاهلية وصدر الإسلام.pdf

ويؤيد هذا ما تقوله الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA عن احبار يهود المدينة (الذي في نظرهم كانوا مصدرا من مصادر القران حسب ادعائهم و حاش لله )
he connected his teaching with that of the Holy Scriptures of the Jews and Christians, of whose contents, however, he had in many particulars only a very imperfect knowledge—his teachers having been monks

or half-educated Jews

—and this knowledge he often repeated in a confused and perverted fashion.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8263-islam

ثالثا : ذكر ان يهود الجزيرة العربية من ضحالة علمهم في نظر بقية اليهود لم يكونوا ينفذوا وصايا التلمود بل ان التلمود لم يكن مصدرا مهما لهم

نقرا من كتاب تاريخ اليهود في بلاد العرب لاسرائيل ولفنسون الصفحة 13

**محمد سني 1989** · 13-06-2019, 01:43

خامسا : امية النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم تسقط دعوى الاقتباس من اساسها فكيف لعربي امي لا يجيد القراءة و لا الكتابة بالعربية ان يقرا و يطالع كتابا يهوديا مكتوب بالعبرية او السريانية او الحبشية (كما سنوضح لاحقا ) !!!!!

.

قال تعالى : ((

وَمَا كُنتَ تَتْلُو مِن قَبْلِهِ مِن كِتَابٍ وَلَا تَخُطُّهُ بِيَمِينِكَ ۖ إِذًا لَّارْتَابَ الْمُبْطِلُونَ

(48) بَلْ هُوَ آيَاتٌ بَيِّنَاتٌ فِي صُدُورِ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْعِلْمَ ۚ وَمَا يَجْحَدُ بِآيَاتِنَا إِلَّا الظَّالِمُونَ (49)))

و نقرا في صحيح البخاري كتاب الصوم باب قول النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم لا نكتب ولا نحسب 1814 حدثنا آدم حدثنا شعبة حدثنا الأسود بن قيس حدثنا سعيد بن عمرو أنه سمع ابن عمر رضي الله عنهما عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه قا

ل إنا أمة أمية لا نكتب

ولا نحسب الشهر هكذا وهكذا يعني مرة تسعة وعشرين ومرة ثلاثين

و نقرا في صحيح بن حبان كتاب السير باب الموادعة و المهادنة رقم الحديث: 4982
(حديث مرفوع) أَخْبَرَنَا النَّضْرُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ الْمُبَارَكِ ، قَالَ : حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عُثْمَانَ الْعِجْلِيُّ ، قَالَ : حَدَّثَنَا عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُوسَى ، عَنْ إِسْرَائِيلَ ، عَنْ أَبِي إِسْحَاقَ ، عَنِ الْبَرَاءِ ، قَالَ : " اعْتَمَرَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي ذِي الْقَعْدَةِ ، فَأَبَى أَهْلُ مَكَّةَ أَنْ يَدَعُوهَ أَنْ يَدْخُلَ مَكَّةَ حَتَّى قَاضَاهُمْ عَلَى أَنْ يُقِيمَ بِهَا ثَلاثَةَ أَيَّامٍ ، فَلَمَّا كَتَبُوا الْكِتَابَ كَتَبُوا هَذَا مَا قَاضَى عَلَيْهِ مُحَمَّدٌ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ، فَقَالُوا : لا نُقِرُّ بِهَذَا ، لَوْ نَعْلَمُ أَنَّكَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ مَا مَنَعْنَاكَ شَيْئًا ، وَلَكِنْ أَنْتَ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ، فَقَالَ : أَنَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ، وَأَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ، فَقَالَ لِعَلِيٍّ : امْحُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ، قَالَ : وَاللَّهِ لا أَمْحُوكَ أَبَدًا ، فَأَخَذَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ الْكِتَابَ

وَلَيْسَ يُحْسِنُ يَكْتُبُ

، فَأَمَرَ ، فَكَتَبَ مَكَانَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ مُحَمَّدًا ، فَكَتَبَ هَذَا مَا قَاضَى عَلَيْهِ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ، أَنْ لا يَدْخَلَ مَكَّةَ بِالسِّلاحِ إِلا السَّيْفَ ، وَلا يَخْرُجُ مِنْهَا بِأَحَدٍ يَتْبَعُهُ ، وَلا يَمْنَعُ أَحَدًا مِنْ أَصْحَابِهِ إِنْ أَرَادَ أَنْ يُقِيمَ بِهَا ، فَلَمَّا دَخَلَهَا وَمَضَى الأَجَلُ أَتَوْا عَلِيًّا

و نقرا في صحيح مسلم كتاب الجهاد و السير باب صلح الحديبية
1783 حدثنا إسحق بن إبراهيم الحنظلي وأحمد بن جناب المصيصي جميعا عن عيسى بن يونس واللفظ لإسحق أخبرنا عيسى بن يونس أخبرنا زكرياء عن أبي إسحق عن البراء قال لما أحصر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم عند البيت صالحه أهل مكة على أن يدخلها فيقيم بها ثلاثا ولا يدخلها إلا بجلبان السلاح السيف وقرابه ولا يخرج بأحد معه من أهلها ولا يمنع أحدا يمكث بها ممن كان معه قال لعلي اكتب الشرط بيننا بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم هذا ما قاضى عليه محمد رسول الله فقال له المشركون لو نعلم أنك رسول الله تابعناك ولكن اكتب محمد بن عبد الله فأمر عليا أن يمحاها فقال علي

لا والله لا أمحاها فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أرني مكانها فأراه مكانها

فمحاها وكتب ابن عبد الله .

و نقرا في السنن الكبرى للبيهقي كتاب النكاح
12916 باب لم يكن له أن يتعلم شعرا ولا يكتب قال الله تعالى: ( وما علمناه الشعر وما ينبغي له )
وقال: ( فآمنوا بالله ورسوله النبي الأمي ) قال بعض أهل التفسير: الأمي: الذي لا يقرأ الكتاب ، ولا يخط بيمينه . وهذا قول مقاتل بن سليمان ، وغيره من أهل التفسير .
( وأخبرنا ) أبو حازم الحافظ ، أنبأ أبو بكر الإسماعيلي ، ثنا علي بن سراج المصري ، ثنا محمد بن عبد الرحمن ، ابن أخي حسين الجعفي ، ثنا أبو أسامة ، عن إدريس الأودي ، عن الحكم بن عتيبة ، عن مجاهد ، عن عبد الله بن عباس - رضي الله عنهما - في قوله - عز وجل: ( وما كنت تتلو من قبله من كتاب ولا تخطه بيمينك ) ، قال:

لم يكن رسول الله - صلى الله عليه وسلم - يقرأ ، ولا يكتب

.

هذا مع الاخذ بعين الاعتبار ان التلمود ان كان متوفرا لدى يهود الجزيرة العربية (على عكس ما ذكره اسرائيل ولفنسون في النقطة الرابعة اعلاه) فانه لا يمكن الا ان يكون باللغة العبرية او السريانية او حتى الحبشية و ان كان احتمالا ضئيلا

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA :
What he received from the Jews was mixed with haggadic elements current orally among Arabian Jews or existing in written form [

—probably preserved in Ethiopic translations of Hebrew pseudepigraphic writings.

—K.];

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8263-islam

ملاحظات :

الملاحظة الاولى : ذكر الفيلسوف اليهودي الشهير فيلو (و الذي عاصر المسيح عليه الصلاة و السلام) قصة خلق ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام و لكن على عكس ما قد يدعيه اعداء الاسلام فانه لم يتطرق لاختلاف انواع التراب الذي خلق منه ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام و انما اكتفى بذكر ان التراب او الطينة التي خلق منها ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام هي افضل الانواع الموجودة على الارض

.

نقرا من كتاب Philo, vol. I, On the Creation. Allegorical Interpretation of Genesis 2 and 3 الفصل 47 الصفحة 109

https://ryanfb.github.io/loebolus-data/L226.pdf

الملاحظة الثانية : ذكر صاحب كتاب Sibylline Oracles (وهو كتاب يرجع تدوينه الى القرن السادس الميلادي ويجمع مجموعة من الاشعار اليهودية و النصرانية) قصة عن ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام قد يدعي اعداء الاسلام الاقتباس منه الا انه لن يفيدهم لان القصة المقصودة هنا لا تتحدث عن جمع التراب الذي خلق منه ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام من اركان الارض الاربعة و لكن تذكر السبب الذي سمي به ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام بهذا الاسم حيث كل حرف من اسمه باليونانية يمثل احد اركان الارض الاربعة و هذه لا علاقة لها لا من قريب و لا من قريب بخلق ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام او اصناف التراب المختلفة المستخدمة في خلقه

نقرا في كتاب Sibylline Oracles الجزء الثالث
30 This is the God who formed four-lettered Adam,
The first one formed, and filling with his name
East, west, and south, and north. The same is he
Who fixed the pattern of the human form,
And made wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/sib/sib05.htm

و مما يؤكد هذا ما ذكر في الهامش نقلا عن القديس اوغسطين الذي كان مؤمنا بهذه الفكرة ايضا :
0. Four-lettered Adam.--The ingenuity which seer,

in the four letters of this name the Greek initials of the words for east, west, north, and south

surpasses even that noted in book i, 102, where Hades is traced in the word Adam.

But Augustine adopts this, and says: "According to the Greek tongue, Adam himself signifies the whole world. For there are four letters, A, D, A, M, and in Greek speech these are the initial letters of the four quarters of the earth

." {Greek ?Anatolh'}, east; {Greek Du'sis}, west; {Greek ?Arktos}, north; {Greek Meshmbri'a} south. Eharratio in Psalmum, xcv, 15 [L., 37, 1236]. See also Tractatus in Joannis, ix, 14, and x, 12 [L., 35, 1465, 1473].]

https://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/sib/sib05.htm

**محمد سني 1989** · 13-06-2019, 01:44

الجزء السادس: قصة نفخ الله عز وجل الروح في انف ادم .

بسم الله الرحم الرحيم

نقرا من صحيح بن حبان كتاب التاريخ باب بدء الخلق رقم الحديث: 6299(حديث مرفوع) أَخْبَرَنَا أَخْبَرَنَا الْحَسَنُ بْنُ سُفْيَانَ ، حَدَّثَنَا هُدْبَةُ بْنُ خَالِدٍ ، حَدَّثَنَا حَمَّادُ بْنُ سَلَمَةَ ، عَنْ ثَابِتٍ ، عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ ، أَنّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ : " لَمَّا نَفَخَ فِي آدَمَ ، فَبَلَغَ الرُّوحُ رَأْسَهُ عَطَسَ ، فَقَالَ : الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ ، فَقَالَ لَهُ تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى : يَرْحَمُكَ اللَّهُ "

قال الامام الالباني في السلسلة الصحيحة الحديث رقم 2159 :
((2159 - " لما نفخ الله في آدم الروح، فبلغ الروح رأسه عطس، فقال: الحمد لله رب
العالمين، فقال له تبارك وتعالى: يرحمك الله ".
أخرجه ابن حبان (2081) والحاكم (4 / 263) من طريقين عن حماد بن سلمة عن
ثابت عن أنس مرفوعا، إلا الحاكم فموقوفا، وقال: " صحيح على شرط مسلم،
وإن كان موقوفا "، ووافقه الذهبي وهو كما قالا. وللحديث شاهد مرفوع من
حديث أبي هريرة وهو مخرج في " تخريج السنة لابن أبي عاصم " (204 و 205) .
(تنبيه) : أورد السيوطي الحديث في " الجامع الصغير " دون " الكبير " برواية
المذكورين بزيادة: " مارت وطارت ". وليست عندهما، فلا أدري من أين وقعت
إليه؟))

ظن بعض الجهلة من الملاحدة ان نص الحديث الصحيح في الاعلى مقتبس من التلمود و المدراش و في الحقيقة لن اكلف نفسي عناء البحث في المدراشات و لا التلمود و لا في غيرها من المصادر اليهودية لان الملحد الذي يدعي الاقتباس هنا اثبت جهله بنصوص العهد القديم

فهذا النص موجود بالحرف في العهد القديم

نقرا في سفر التكوين الاصحاح الثاني
7. و جبل الرب الاله ادم ترابا من الارض

و نفخ في انفه نسمة حياة فصار ادم نفسا حية

.

وقد ترددت كثيرا في اعتبار مثل هذا الادعاء شبهة لانه نابع ليس عن جهل فقط بل عن جهل فظيع لا يستحق الالتفات اليه اصلا و لكنني رايت ان ابين جهل بعض الملاحدة على النت

**محمد سني 1989** · 13-06-2019, 01:46

الجزء السابع : توبة ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام .

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

قال تعالى : (( فَأَزَلَّهُمَا الشَّيْطَانُ عَنْهَا فَأَخْرَجَهُمَا مِمَّا كَانَا فِيهِ ۖ وَقُلْنَا اهْبِطُوا بَعْضُكُمْ لِبَعْضٍ عَدُوٌّ ۖ وَلَكُمْ فِي الْأَرْضِ مُسْتَقَرٌّ وَمَتَاعٌ إِلَىٰ حِينٍ (36) فَتَلَقَّىٰ آدَمُ مِن رَّبِّهِ كَلِمَاتٍ فَتَابَ عَلَيْهِ ۚ إِنَّهُ هُوَ التَّوَّابُ الرَّحِيمُ (37)))

يدعي اعداء الاسلام اليوم من الملاحدة و المنصرين ان توبة ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام كما في الاية الكريمة اعلاه مقتبس من كتب يهودية متاخرة و هي مجرد كتب تفسيرية تحتوي على الاساطير لا اقل و لا اكثر

و الحقيقة عكس ذلك اذ ان المتتبع للمصادر التي يدعون اقتباس القران منها لا تخلو ان تكون احد ثلاثة :

1. مصادر بعد الاسلام (بعد القرن السابع)

2. مصادر جمعت بشكل اولي قبل الاسلام بزمن بسيط و لكنها تعرضت لاضافات و تنقيحات كثيرة لقرون امتدت الى فترة ما بعد الاسلام

3. مصادر قبل الاسلام بقرون طويلة تمتد الى فترة ما قبل المسيح عليه الصلاة و السلام ويصل تراثها الشفهي الى زمان ابعد من ذلك .

المصادر التي يدعي هؤلاء الاقتباس منها هي :

1. مدراش فرقي العازر

2. كتاب ابوت راباي ناثان

3. كتاب ادم و حواء ( الترجمة اللاتينية)

4. التلمود

ملاحظة: قصة توبة ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام تختلف جوهريا و جذريا عن قصة توبته في المصادر التي سنعرضها بحيث ان فكرة او شبهة الاقتباس تكاد تكون منعدمة للقارئ البسيط ولا يوجد اي تقاطع بين القصتين الا من حيث المبدا العام للتوبة . وقد يتساءل القارئ عن سبب ذكري لهذا الموضوع كشبهة مع عدم وجود اي نوع من التطابق او التشابه فاقول حينها وبحول الله ان السبب هو ما يحتمل من تلقف الالسنة الشعواء لهذه الشبهة و نشرها و تداولها بين العوام (و خاصة السذج منهم) في وسائل التواصل الاجتماعي و المنتديات و غيرها

.

سنرد باذن الله على كل نقطة على حدة

اولا : مدراش فرقي العازر

النص المدعى للاقتباس :
مدراش فرقي العازر الفصل العشرون :
On the first day of the week he went into the waters of the upper Gihon until the waters reached up to his neck, and he fasted seven weeks of days, until his body became like a species of seaweed. Adam said before the Holy One, blessed be He: Sovereign of all worlds ! Remove, I pray Thee, my sins from me and accept my repentance, and all the generations will learn that repentance is a reality. What did the Holy One, blessed be He, do? He put forth His right hand, and accepted his repentance, and took away from him his sin, as it is said, "I acknowledge my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid: I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah" (Ps. 32:5)

https://www.sefaria.org/Pirkei_DeRab...r.20.9?lang=en

دعوى الاقتباس مردودة لعلتين :

1. مدراش فرقي العازر تم تاليفه بعد الاسلام فقيل في القرن التاسع وقيل في الثامن فالاقتباس اذا مستحيل هنا لانه متاخر عن الاسلام

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية :
PIRḲE DE-RABBI ELI'EZER:
By: Joseph Jacobs, Schulim Ochser
Haggadicmidrashic work on Genesis, part of Exodus, and a few sentences of Numbers; ascribed to R. Eliezer b. Hyrcanus,

and composed in Italy shortly after 833. It is quoted immediately before the end of the twelfth century

under the following titles: Pirḳe Rabbi Eli'ezer ha-Gadol (Maimonides, "Moreh," ii., xxvi.); Pirḳe Rabbi Eli'ezer ben Hyrcanus ("Seder R. Amram," ed. Warsaw, 1865, p. 32a); Baraita de-Rabbi Eli'ezer("'Aruk," s.v. ; Rashi on Gen. xvii. 3; gloss to Rashi on Meg. 22b; David Ḳimḥi, "Shorashim," s.v. ); Haggadah de-Rabbi Eli'ezer ben Hyrcanus (R. Tam, in Tos. Ket. 99a).

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...rabbi-eli-ezer

بل على العكس فان هذا المدراش تاثر مؤلفه كثيرا بالاسلام و ليس العكس و حتى في القصص المتعلقة بادم عليه الصلاة و السلام

وذكرت الموسوعة اليهودية ذلك نقلا عن المستشرق زونز :
Another legend connects the building of the Kaaba with Abraham. When the time came for Adam to die, he had forgotten the gift of forty years to David, and had to be reminded of it by the Angel of Death. He is said to have been buried in the "Cave of Treasures"—a Christian, rather than a Jewish, idea. S

everal of these peculiar features are found again in the Pirḳe de-Rabbi Eliezer, a work that was compiled under Arabic influence

(Zunz, "G. V." 2d ed., pp. 289 et seq.).

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/758-adam

و نقرا في مقدمة مدراش فرقي العازر :

Composed in Talmudic Israel/Babylon (c.630 - c.1030 CE). Pirke

de-Rabbi Eliezer (Chapters of Rabbi Eliezer) is an aggadic-midrashic work on the Torah containing exegesis and retellings of biblical stories. The composition enjoyed widespread circulation and recognition throughout Jewish history, and continues to do so in the present. Traditionally, it has been understood to be a tannaitic composition which originated with the tanna Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, - a disciple of Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakai and teacher of Rabbi Akiva - and his disciples.

However, modern scholarship has shown the book in fact a a medieval work from the 8th Century

. The work is divided into 54 chapters, which may be divided into seven groups. Pirke De-Rabbi Eliezer comprises exegesis, legends and folklore, as well as astronomical discussions related to the story of the Creation. The author dwells longest on the description of the second day of Creation, in which the Ma'aseh ha-Merkavah (Ezek. i.) is described in various forms.

https://www.sefaria.org/Pirkei_DeRabbi_Eliezer?lang=en

2. الاختلافات الشاسعة بين نص المدراش و بين السياق القراني

:

النص المدراشي يذكر ان ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام من اجل طلب المغفرة دخل في مياه نهر جيحون وصام سبعة اسابيع ثم في نهاية السبع اسابيع دعا بدعاء استجاب الله عز وجل له و غفر له بينما النص القراني لا يذكر نهر جيحون و لا الصيام و لا غير ذلك بل كلمات تلقاها ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام من ربه ثم تاب عليه

.

ثانيا : كتاب ابوت راباي ناثان :

النص المدعى للاقتباس :
كتاب ابوت راباي ناثان الفصل الاول نقلا من موسوعة اليهودية ( نظرا لعدم تمكني من ايجاد النص بالانجليزية ):
Adam is represented as a type of a penitent sinner. Thus, he is described in Vita Adæ et Evæ, as well as by the rabbis of the second century ('Er. 18b; 'Ab. Zarah, 8a; Ab. R. N. i.; Pirḳe R. El.), as undergoing a terrible ordeal while fasting, praying, and bathing in the river for seven and forty days (seven weeks, Pirḳe R. El.), or twice seven weeks

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/758-adam

دعوى الاقتباس مردودة لعلتين :

1. الكتاب

تم تاليفه بعد الاسلام فقيل بين القرن الثامن و التساع وقيل العاشر فالاقتباس اذا مستحيل هنا لانه متاخر عن الاسلام .

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية : The designation "De-Rabbi Nathan" may perhaps be explained by the circumstance that R. Nathan is one of the first authorities mentioned in the opening chapter of the work. Perhaps the school of the tannaite R. Nathan originated the work. It is also called Tosefta to Abot (see Horowitz, "Uralte Toseftas," i. 6, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1889; Brüll's "Jahrbücher," ix. 139 et seq.). The

two recensions of the work in their present shape evidently have different authors; but who they were can not be ascertained. Probably they belonged to the period of the Geonim, between the eighth and ninth centuries

.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...e-rabbi-nathan

نقرا من مقدمة الكتاب :

Composed in Talmudic Israel/Babylon (c.650 - c.950 CE)

. The minor tractates (Masekhtot Ketanot) are essays from the Tannaitic period or later dealing with topics about which no formal tractate exists in the Mishnah. The first eight or so contain much original material; the last seven or so are collections of material scattered throughout the Talmud. Avot of Rabbi Natan (Father Rabbi Nathan). The Schechter edition contains two different versions (version A has 41 chapters and version B has 48).

https://www.sefaria.org/Avot_D'Rabbi_Natan?lang=en

2. الاختلافات الشاسعة بين النص في كتاب ابوت راباي ناثان وبين النص القراني :

نص الكتاب يذكر الصيام لمدة 47 يوما في النهر بينما السياق القراني لا يذكر هذا انما يذكر ان ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام تلقى كلمات من ربه فتاب عليه بعدها و لا وجود للصيام و لا النهر

.

ثالثا :

الترجمة اللاتينية لكتاب حياة ادم و حواء المعروف ب Vita Adami et Evae

:
النص المدعي للاقتباس :
نقرا في الترجمة اللاتينية لحياة ادم و حواء الفصل السادس و السابع و الثامن :
6.1 Adam said to Eve: "You cannot do as much as I, but do as much so that you might be saved. For I will do forty days of fasting. You, however, arise and go to the Tigris River and take a stone and stand upon it in the water up to your neck in the depth of the river. Let not a word go forth from your mouth since we are unworthy to ask of the Lord for our lips are unclean from the illicit and forbidden tree.
6.2 Stand in the water of the river for thirtyseven days. I however, will do forty days in the water of the Jordan. Perhaps the Lord will have mercy on us."
7.1 Eve walked to the Tigris River and did just as Adam told her.ت
7.2 Likewise, Adam walked to the Jordan River and stood upon a rock up to his neck in the water.
8.1 Adam said: "I say to you, water of the Jordan, mourn with me and separate from me all swimming creatures which are in you. Let them surround me and mourn with me.
8.2 Let them not lament for themselves, but for me, for they have not sinned, but I."
8.3 Immediately, all living things came and surrounded him and the water of the Jordan stood from that hour not flowing in its course.

https://www2.iath.virginia.edu/anders.../vita.lat.html

و الكتاب له نظير باليونانية و يسمى ب Apocalypsis Mosis اي رؤيا موسى

و اقول : ان دعوى الاقتباس هنا قائمة على اساس باطل الا و هي دعوى ان هذا السفر لا اصل له و هو عمل منحول لبعض الربانيين و الاحبار لمجرد عدم دخوله في قانونية اسفار الكتاب المقدس اليوم

و هذا مردود لاكثر من سبب :

اولا : ان الترجمة اللاتينية لكتاب حياة ادم و حواء Vita Adami et Evae و الترجمة اليونانية Apocalypse of Moses مقتبسان من اصل عبري مفقود يرجع تاريخ تدوينه الى فترة ما قبل تدمير الهيكل الثاني بل الى فترة ما قبل المسيح عليه الصلاة و السلام و تحديدا الفترة الهيلينية و هذا يعني انه قد يكون مستمد من تراث شفهي اقدم

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية :

There can be no doubt, however, that there existed at an early date, perhaps even before the destruction of the Second Temple, a collection of legends of Adam and Eve which have been partially preserved, not in their original language, but somewhat changed

. It is possible to prove that the apocryphas, Apocalypsis Mosis— as Tischendorf, following a copyist's erroneous inscription, called the book—and Vita Adæ et Evæ, and to a certain degree even their Slavonic, Syriac, Ethiopic, and Arabic offshoots,

are of identical Jewish origin

. According to these apocryphal works and to the Eastern and Western forms of the Apocalypsis, the Jewish portion of the Book of Adam must have read somewhat as follows (the parallels in apocryphal and rabbinical literature are placed in parentheses)

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...9-adam-book-of

نقرا من الموسوعة البريطانية :

Biography was an extremely popular literary genre during the late Hellenistic period of Judaism (3rd century BC to 3rd century AD

), and legends of biblical figures were numerous. But all surviving Haggada (folk stories and anecdotes) about Adam and Eve are Christian works and are preserved in a number of ancient languages (e.g., Greek, Latin, Ethiopic). Although all Aramaic and Hebrew texts have been lost, the basic material was presumably of Jewish authorship

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Life-of-Adam-and-Eve

ويقدر تاريخ تدوين الترجمتين اليونانية و اللاتينية بين الاعوام 20 قبل الميلاد - 70 بعد الميلاد

نقرا من الموسوعة البريطانية :
Extant versions of the Life of Adam and Eve have consequently been used to reconstruct the supposed original,

which was probably composed sometime between 20 BC and AD 70, because the apocalyptic portion of the work (chapter 29) seems to imply that the Herodian Temple of Jerusalem was functioning when the book was written

. The book is primarily noteworthy for its imaginative retelling of the biblical story and for its inclusion of visions and angelology, both characteristic of Hellenistic religious writing

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Life-of-Adam-and-Eve

ثانيا : السفر خالي من الاضافات النصرانية حسب اقوال النقاد فتراجمه تخلو من التعديلات و التنقيحات النصرانية مما يزيدنا وثاقة بقوة ارتباط هاتين الترجمتين بالاصل العبري

:
نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية :
The reconstruction of the Jewish Book of Adam here attempted may be hypothetical in some points, for neither the Apoc. Mosis nor the Vita can be considered to represent a true copy of the original.

But it makes clear that these two apocryphas are based on the Hebrew or Aramaic Book of Adam and that the latter belongs to the midrashic literature, as many of its allusions can only be explained by the Midrash.

...With regard to the alleged Christian elements and reminiscences of the New Testament in the Apoc. Mosis and Vita they will be sufficiently characterized by the

following examples: Apoc. Mosis, iii., "Child of Wrath," is based on a haggadic etymology of the name Cain, and has nothing to do with Eph. ii. 3; and Apoc. Mosis, xix., "Lust is the beginning of all sin," is thoroughly Jewish (see above), and need not therefore have been taken from such a source as James, i. 15. This, moreover, is the case with all the other alleged Christian passages in the Apoc. Mosis, which would prove nothing, even if they were of Christian origin; for it can not be surprising to find Christian allusions in the language of a book so widely read among Christians as the Apocrypha. Even passages where one would expect that a Christian editor or compiler would interject Christological notions are quite free from them; all of which tends to show that neither the Apoc. Mosis nor the Vita was in any way tampered with by Christian writers.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/759-adam-book-of

ثالثا : لم يكن للمسيحيين الاوائل و لا اباء الكنيسة نفس النظرة تجاه الاسفار الابوكريفية كما للنصارى اليوم بل ان في العهد الجديد اقتباسات واضحة من اسفار ابوكريفية

.
نقرا مثلا من قاموس الكتاب المقدس :

ويقتبس كاتب رسالة يهوذا في عددي 14و15 سفر أخنوخ ص 1: 9. وكذلك يوجد لبعض الأقوال الخاصة بأواخر الأيام في العهد الجديد ما يقابلها في سفر أخنوخ. و في سفر أخنوخ. وقد اقتبس بعض الآباء في العصور المسيحية الأولى بعض أقوال هذا السفر. ومن بين هؤلاء جاستين الشهيد وأرينيوس وأكليمندوس الاسكندري وأوريجانوس

. ولكن قادة المسيحيين فيما بعد أنكروا هذا الكتاب ورفضوه. ومن بين هؤلاء يوحنا فم الذهب وأغسطينوس وجيروم أو أورينيموس. ولم يعتبر اليهود او المسيحيون هذا الكتاب ضمن الأسفار القانونية.

https://st-takla.org/Full-Free-Coptic...A/A_121_1.html

تصريح اباء الكنيسة باقتباس العهد الجديد من اسفار ابوكريفية و اسفار ضائعة

اقتباس

اولا : تصريح جيروم
نقرا من انجيل متى 27:5 فَطَرَحَ الْفِضَّةَ فِي الْهَيْكَلِ وَانْصَرَفَ، ثُمَّ مَضَى وَخَنَقَ نَفْسَهُ. 6 فَأَخَذَ رُؤَسَاءُ الْكَهَنَةِ الْفِضَّةَ وَقَالُوا: «لاَ يَحِلُّ أَنْ نُلْقِيَهَا فِي الْخِزَانَةِ لأَنَّهَا ثَمَنُ دَمٍ».
7 فَتَشَاوَرُوا وَاشْتَرَوْا بِهَا حَقْلَ الْفَخَّارِيِّ مَقْبَرَةً لِلْغُرَبَاءِ.
8 لِهذَا سُمِّيَ ذلِكَ الْحَقْلُ «حَقْلَ الدَّمِ» إِلَى هذَا الْيَوْمِ.
9 حِينَئِذٍ تَمَّ
مَا قِيلَ بِإِرْمِيَا النَّبِيِّ
الْقَائِلِ: «وَأَخَذُوا الثَّلاَثِينَ مِنَ الْفِضَّةِ، ثَمَنَ الْمُثَمَّنِ الَّذِي ثَمَّنُوهُ مِنْ بَني إِسْرَائِيلَ،
10 وَأَعْطَوْهَا عَنْ حَقْلِ الْفَخَّارِيِّ، كَمَا أَمَرَنِي الرَّبُّ».

ذكر القديس جيروم ان ما اقتبسه متى في العدد التاسع موجود في احد الاسفار الابوكريفية لارمياء :يقول ادم كلارك في تفسيره :
Jeremy the prophet - The words quoted here are not found in the Prophet Jeremiah, but in Zac 11:13. But St.
Jerome says that a Hebrew of the sect of the Nazarenes showed him this prophecy in a Hebrew apocryphal copy of Jeremiah
; but probably they were inserted there only to countenance the quotation here.
https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/cmt/clarke/mat027.htm

ثانيا : تصريح يوحنا ذهبي الفم
نقرا في متى 2 :
19 فَلَمَّا مَاتَ هِيرُودُسُ، إِذَا مَلاَكُ الرَّبِّ قَدْ ظَهَرَ فِي حُلْمٍ لِيُوسُفَ فِي مِصْرَ20 قَائِلاً: «قُمْ وَخُذِ الصَّبِيَّ وَأُمَّهُ وَاذْهَبْ إِلَى أَرْضِ إِسْرَائِيلَ، لأَنَّهُ قَدْ مَاتَ الَّذِينَ كَانُوا يَطْلُبُونَ نَفْسَ الصَّبِيِّ».
21 فَقَامَ وَأَخَذَ الصَّبِيَّ وَأُمَّهُ وَجَاءَ إِلَى أَرْضِ إِسْرَائِيلَ.
22 وَلكِنْ لَمَّا سَمِعَ أَنَّ أَرْخِيلاَوُسَ يَمْلِكُ عَلَى الْيَهُودِيَّةِ عِوَضًا عَنْ هِيرُودُسَ أَبِيهِ، خَافَ أَنْ يَذْهَبَ إِلَى هُنَاكَ. وَإِذْ أُوحِيَ إِلَيْهِ فِي حُلْمٍ، انْصَرَفَ إِلَى نَوَاحِي الْجَلِيلِ.
23 وَأَتَى وَسَكَنَ فِي مَدِينَةٍ يُقَالُ لَهَا نَاصِرَ
ةُ، لِكَيْ يَتِمَّ مَا قِيلَ بِالأَنْبِيَاءِ: «إِنَّهُ سَيُدْعَى نَاصِرِيًّا

يصرح يوحنا ذهبي الفم ان العدد 23 لا يوجد في العهد القديم و لكنه ينتمي الى احد الاسفار الضائعة :نقرا من كتاب يوحنا ذهبي الفم Homilies on the Gospel of Matthew الفصل IX الصفحة 113
6. We see here the cause why the angel also, putting them at ease for
the future, restores them to their home. And not even this simply, but
he adds to it a prophecy, "That it might be fulfilled," saith he, "which
was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene."
And what manner of prophet said this? Be not curious, nor

overbusy. For many of the prophetic writings have been lost; and

this one may see from the history of the Chronicles.For being

negligent, and continually falling into ungodliness, some they

suffered to perish, others they themselves burnt upand cut to pieces.

The latter fact Jeremiah relates;the former, he who composed book of

Deuteronomy was hardly found, buried somewhere and lost
. But if,
when there was no barbarian there, they so betrayed their books,
much more when the barbarians had overrun them. For as to the
fact, that the prophet had foretold it, the apostles themselves in
many places call Him a Nazarene.
https://www.documentacatholicaomnia.e...atthew,_EN.pdf

رابعا : الاختلاف بين القصة الواردة في كتاب حياة ادم و حواء و بين السياق القراني :

القصة في كتاب ادم و حواء تذكر صيام ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام في نهر لاردن لمدة اربعين يوما وكذلك صيام حواء في نهر دجلة لمدة 37 يوما و لم تذكر ان كان الله عز وجل تاب عليهما ام لا اما القصة القرانية فتذكر ان ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام تلقى من ربه كلمات فتاب الله عز وجل عليه

.

يتبع

**محمد سني 1989** · 13-06-2019, 01:47

رابعا : التلمود :

النص المدعى للاقتباس :
نقرا من تلمود Eruvin 18b:
The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: Rabbi Meir would say: Adam the first man was very pious. When he saw that death was imposed as a punishment because of him, he observed a fast for a hundred thirty years, and he separated from his wife for a hundred thirty years, and wore belts [zarzei] of fig leaves on his body as his only garment for a hundred thirty years.

https://www.sefaria.org/Eruvin.18b.1...h=all&lang2=en

و نقرا من تلمود Avoda Zarah 8a:
With regard to the dates of these festivals, the Sages taught: When Adam the first man saw that the day was progressively diminishing, as the days become shorter from the autumnal equinox until the winter solstice, he did not yet know that this is a normal phenomenon, and therefore he said: Woe is me; perhaps because I sinned the world is becoming dark around me and will ultimately return to the primordial state of chaos and disorder. And this is the death that was sentenced upon me from Heaven, as it is written: “And to dust shall you return” (Genesis 3:19). He arose and spent eight days in fasting and in prayer.

https://www.sefaria.org/Avodah_Zarah...h=all&lang2=en

و للرد نقول :

اولا : ان دعوى الاقتباس هنا قائمة على اساس باطل الا و هي دعوى ان التلمود كله باطل و مجرد عمل متاخر يحتوي على الخرافات و الحقيقة هي ان التلمود و ان بدا تدوينه في القرن الثاني الميلادي الا انه تجميع لتراث شفهي يرجع بعضه الى زمن السبي او حتى ما قبل السبي بقول النقاد

و تتضح اهميته الجلية عند اليهود في اطلاقهم عليه تسمية " التوراة الشفهية" فالتلمود عندهم يعتبر اهم المصادر بعد التناخ (العهد القديم) حيث يضم المشناة و الهاجاداه و يعتبر عندهم بقية علوم الانبياء التي لم يتم تدوينها في اسفار العهد القديم و تم تناقلها شفهيا .

بمعنى اخر يمكننا ان نقول ان التلمود يمثل التراث الشفهي اليهودي الممتد من فترة السبي و ما قبله الى قرون تالية

.
نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA:

As early as the third century Joshua ben Levi interpreted Deut. ix. 10 to mean that the entire Law, including Miḳra, Mishnah, Talmud, and Haggadah, had been revealed to Moses on Sinai (

Yer. Pes. 17a, line 59; Meg. 74d, 25), while in Gen. R. lxvi. 3 the blessings invoked in Gen. xxvii. 28 are explained as "Miḳra, Mishnah, Talmud, and Haggadah." The Palestinian haggadist Isaac divided these four branches into two groups: (1) the Miḳra and the Haggadah, dealing with subjects of general interest; and (2) the Mishnah and the Talmud, "which can not hold the attention of those who hear them" (Pesiḳ. 101b; see Bacher, "Ag. Pal. Amor." ii. 211)
....

The history of the origin of the Talmud is the same as that of the Mishnah—a tradition, transmitted orally for centuries

, was finally cast into definite literary form, although from the moment in which the Talmud became the chief subject of study in the academies it had a double existence, and was accordingly, in its final stage, redacted in two different forms. The Mishnah of Judah I. was adopted simultaneously in Babylon and Palestine as the halakic collection par excellence; and at the same time the development of the Talmud was begun both at Sepphoris, where the Mishnah was redacted, and at Nehardea and Sura, where Judah's pupils Samuel and Rab engaged in their epoch-making work. The academies of Babylon and of Palestine alike regarded the study of the Mishnah and its interpretation as their chief task. The Amoraim, as the directors and members of these academies were called ( see Amora), became the originators of the Talmud; and its final redaction marked the end of the amoraic times in the same way that the period of the Tannaim was concluded by the compilation of the Mishnah of Judah I. Like the Mishnah, the Talmud was not the work of one author or of several authors, but was the result of the collective labors of many successive generations, whose toil finally resulted in a book unique in its mode of development.
......
After the completion of the Talmud as a work of literature, it exercised a twofold influence as a historical factor in the history of Judaism and its followers, not only in regard to the guidance and formulation of religious life and thought, but also with respect to the awakening and development of intellectual activity.

As a document of religion the Talmud acquired that authority which was due to it as the written embodiment of the ancient tradition, and it fulfilled the task which the men of the Great Assembly set for the representatives of the tradition when they said, "Make a hedge for the Torah" (Ab. i. 2). Those who professed Judaism felt no doubt that the Talmud was equal to the Bible as a source of instruction and decision in problems of religion, and every effort to set forth religious teachings and duties was based on it

; so that even the great systematic treatise of Maimonides, which was intended to supersede the Talmud, only led to a more thorough study of it. In like manner

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14213-talmud

ثانيا : الجزم بالاقتباس باطل لان تدوين التلمود لم يتم على مرحلة واحدة قبل الاسلام بل امتد تدوينه لقرون طويلة على مدى اجيال اشرف على جمعه عدد من الكتاب و تعرض لبعض التنقيحات على مدى قرون

:
نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA :

The date at which the Talmud was committed to writing is purely conjectural. The work itself contains neither statements nor allusions to show that any complete or partial copy of the work redacted and completed by Ashi and Rabina had been made in their days;

and the same lack of information characterizes both Yerushalmi and the Mishnah (the basis of both the Talmudim), as well as the other works of the tannaitic period. There are, however, allusions, although they are only sporadic, which show that the Halakah and the Haggadah were committed to writing; for copies were described as being in the possession of individual scholars, who were occasionally criticized for owning them. This censure was based on an interdiction issued in the third century, which forbade any one to commit the teachings of tradition to writing or to use a manuscript of such a character in lecturing (see Giṭ. 60a; Tem. 14b).

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14213-talmud

و هذا يعني ان جمع التلمود في كتاب واحد بدا مع الحبر اشي في القرن الرابع ثم الحبر رابي في بداية القرن الخامس الميلادي

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA :
ASHI:
By: Marcus Jastrow, Wilhelm Bacher

A celebrated Babylonian amora; born 352; died 427; reestablished the academy at Sura, and was the first editor of the Babylonian Talmud

. According to a tradition preserved in the academies (Ḳid. 72b), Ashi was born in the same year that Raba, the great teacher of MaḦuza, died, and he was the first teacher of any importance in the Babylonian colleges after Raba's death.
When Ashi undertook the final redaction of the Talmud he evidently had at his disposal notes of this kind, although Brüll (l.c. p. 18) is probably correct in ascribing to Rabina the first complete written copy of the Talmud; Rabina had as collaborators many of the Saboraim, to whom an ancient and incontrovertible tradition assigns numerous additions to the Talmudic text.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/1945-ashi

و نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA:
RABINA I.:
By: Wilhelm Bacher, Jacob Zallel Lauterbach

Babylonian amora of the fifth generation; died about 420

. He was a pupil of Raba b. Joseph b. Ḥama, and his extreme youthfulness at that time is shown by the fact that his teacher designated him and Ḥama b. Bisa as "dardeḳi" (children; B. B. 16b).....
When R. Ashi became director of the Academy of Sura (or Matah Meḥasya), Rabina became a student there, although he was at least as old as Ashi—perhaps even a few years older; however, he was rather the associate of Ashi ("talmid ḥaber") than his pupil ('Er. 63a).

Next to Ashi, Rabina had the greatest share in the redaction of the Talmud undertaken by Ashi and his colleagues.

Rabina died seven years before Ashi.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...12505-rabina-i

الا ان ما كتبوه تمت الاضافة اليه و التعديل عليه اكثر من مرة فالحبر رابينا اضاف و نقح بعضا مما كتبه الحبر اشي ثم مع توالي الاجيال جاءت تعديلات و اضافات اكثر

نقرا في الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA :
The academies of Babylon and of Palestine alike regarded the study of the Mishnah and its interpretation as their chief task.

The Amoraim, as the directors and members of these academies were called ( see Amora), became the originators of the Talmud; and its final redaction marked the end of the amoraic times in the same way that the period of the Tannaim was concluded by the compilation of the Mishnah of Judah I. Like the Mishnah, the Talmud was not the work of one author or of several authors, but was the result of the collective labors of many successive generations, whose toil finally resulted in a book unique in its mode of development.

......
. When Ashi undertook the final redaction of the Talmud he evidently had at his disposal notes of this kind, although Brüll (l.c. p. 18) is probably correct in ascribing to

Rabina the first complete written copy of the Talmud; Rabina had as collaborators many of the Saboraim, to whom an ancient and incontrovertible tradition assigns numerous additions to the Talmudic text

.
No Formal Ratification.
When Rabina died a written text of the Talmud was already in existence,

the material contributed by the Saboraim being merely additions; although in thus extending the text they simply continued what had been done since the first redaction of the Talmud by Ashi.

The Saboraim, however, confined themselves to additions of a certain form which made no change whatsoever in the text as determined by them under the direction of Rabina (on these saboraic additions as well as on other accretions in Babli, see the statements by Brüll, l.c. pp. 69-86).

Yet there is no allusion whatever to a formal sanction of the written text of the Talmud; for neither did such a ratification take place nor was a formal one at all necessary. The Babylonian academies, which produced the text in the course of 300 years, remained its guardians when it was reduced to writing; and it became authoritative in virtue of its acceptance by the successors of the Amoraim

, as the Mishnah had been sanctioned by the latter and was made the chief subject of study, thus becoming a basis for halakic decisions. The traditions, however, underwent no further development; for the "horayot," or the independent exegesis of the Mishnah and the halakic decisions based on this exegesis, ceased with Ashi and Rabina, and thus with the completion of the Talmud, as is stated in the canon incorporated in the Talmud itself (B. M. 86a). The Mishnah, the basal work of halakic tradition, thenceforth shared its authority with the Talmud.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14213-talmud

وقد اختلف في متى اخذ التلمود شكله النهائي او بالاحرى متى تم الانتهاء من تدوين التلمود فبينما بعض الباحثين يرى ان ذلك تم في 500 ميلادية ، يرى الاخرون ان التاريخ الارجح لذلك هو في 700 ميلادية

نقرا من the cambridge companion to the talmud and rabbinic literature الصفحة 59 :

https://aveinu.homestead.com/The_Camb...literature.pdf

ثالثا :الجزم بالاقتباس باطل هنا نظرا لعدم توفر اي مخطوطة للتلمود اليوم يعود تاريخها لما قبل الاسلام .

نقرا في الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA :
Earliest Manuscript of the Babli.
In the editions the Babylonian Talmud is so arranged that each paragraph of the Mishnah is followed by the portion of the Talmud which forms the commentary on it; the portions are frequently divided into sections, rubricked by the successive sentences of the mishnaic paragraph on which they are based, although an entire paragraph occasionally serves as a single text. Thus Babli on Ket. ii. 1 (16a-18b) is divided into six sections; but there is no division into sections for ii. 2 (18b-20b), ii. 3 (20b-22a), ii. 5 (23b), and ii. 9 (27b-28a). There are three sections for ii. 4 (23a); two for ii. 6 (23b-26a), ii. 7 (26b-27a), and ii. 8 (27a, b); and eight for ii. 10 (28a, b).

In the Munich codex, which is based on a manuscript of the middle of the ninth century (see Lewy in "Breslauer Jahresbericht," 1905, p. 28)

, the text of the entire chapter of the Mishnah is written in large characters on the inner portion of the page, separated from the Talmudic text, which is in a different script. In the fragments in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, written in 1123 and containing a portion of the treatise Keritot (see "J. Q. R." ix. 145), each chapter is headed by the entire mishnaic text on which it is based

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14213-talmud

فاقدم مخطوطة للتلمود عندنا هي مخطوطة ميونخ و التي هي في الاصل نسخت من مخطوطة اخرى في منتصف القرن التاسع
وقد تم نسخ مخطوطة ميونخ في القرن الرابع عشر الميلادي
نقرا من FREDBERG JEWISH MANUSCRIPT SOCIETY:

Between the years 1342 and 1343 Shlomo ben Shimshon copied by hand the complete Babylonian Talmud in one volume containing 577 pages

. Thetype of script Shlomo ben Shimshon used was not the elegant square script commonly used for writing canonical treatises, but a middling script—that enabled a denser and more massive script and with which the copyist was able to include all 37 tractates of the Talmud in addition to the Mishna in a single volume. Apparently, Shlomo ben Shimshon’s achievement is unprecedented—not only for being the only volume of the Babylonian Talmud preserved in manuscript, but primarily for being the only one created from the outset as a single volume. Over the generations, the manuscript made its way across Europe, passing among various owners who left their signatures in the body of the manuscript. We do not know the name of its original owner since his name was erased by one of the manuscript’s later owners. Various hypotheses have been raised about its whereabouts in the intervening centuries, but what is certain is that some time during the nineteenth century this volume, along and other religious manuscripts, were collected from a German church and placed in the Munich State Library, hence its name—The Munich Manuscript.

https://web.nli.org.il/sites/nlis/en/...munich_95.aspx

رابعا : دعوى الاقتباس من يهود الجزيرة العربية مردودة هنا نظرا لاختلاف البيئة اليهودية في الجزيرة العربية عن تلك الموجودة خارج الجزيرة العربية من جهة الثقافة الدينية و الاجتماعية

فقد ذكر بعض النقاد ان يهود الجزيرة العربية تميزوا بعدة امور تفصلهم عن يهود الشام و العراق و مصر

:

اولا : الانعزالية الاجتماعية و البعد الجغرافي عن بقية يهود العالم مما جعل يهود الجزيرة العربية شبه منقطعين عن بقية يهود العالم و لا يربطهم الا مسمى الديانة و رابطة الدم

ثانيا : ضحالة العلم الديني لدى يهود الجزيرة العربية مقارنة ببقية يهود العالم .

و مما يدل على هذا ما نقرؤه في كتاب تاريخ اليهود في بلاد العرب لاسرائيل ولفنسون الصفحة 11 -12:

file:///Users/MacbookPro/Downloads/مكتبة نور - تاريخ اليهود في بلاد العرب في الجاهلية وصدر الإسلام.pdf

ويؤيد هذا ما تقوله الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA عن احبار يهود المدينة (الذي في نظرهم كانوا مصدرا من مصادر القران حسب ادعائهم و حاش لله )
he connected his teaching with that of the Holy Scriptures of the Jews and Christians, of whose contents, however, he had in many particulars only a very imperfect knowledge—

his teachers having been monks or half-educated Jews

—and this knowledge he often repeated in a confused and perverted fashion.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8263-islam

ثالثا : ذكر ان يهود الجزيرة العربية من ضحالة علمهم في نظر بقية اليهود لم يكونوا ينفذوا وصايا التلمود بل ان التلمود لم يكن مصدرا مهما لهم

نقرا من كتاب تاريخ اليهود في بلاد العرب لاسرائيل ولفنسون الصفحة 13

خامسا : امية النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم تسقط دعوى الاقتباس من اساسها فكيف لعربي امي لا يجيد القراءة و لا الكتابة بالعربية ان يقرا و يطالع كتابا يهوديا مكتوب بالعبرية او السريانية او الحبشية (كما سنوضح لاحقا ) !!!!! .

قال تعالى : ((

وَمَا كُنتَ تَتْلُو مِن قَبْلِهِ مِن كِتَابٍ وَلَا تَخُطُّهُ بِيَمِينِكَ ۖ إِذًا لَّارْتَابَ الْمُبْطِلُونَ

(48) بَلْ هُوَ آيَاتٌ بَيِّنَاتٌ فِي صُدُورِ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْعِلْمَ ۚ وَمَا يَجْحَدُ بِآيَاتِنَا إِلَّا الظَّالِمُونَ (49)))

و نقرا في صحيح البخاري كتاب الصوم باب قول النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم لا نكتب ولا نحسب
1814 حدثنا آدم حدثنا شعبة حدثنا الأسود بن قيس حدثنا سعيد بن عمرو أنه سمع ابن عمر رضي الله عنهما عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه قال

إنا أمة أمية لا نكتب

ولا نحسب الشهر هكذا وهكذا يعني مرة تسعة وعشرين ومرة ثلاثين

و نقرا في صحيح بن حبان كتاب السير باب الموادعة و المهادنة رقم الحديث: 4982
(حديث مرفوع) أَخْبَرَنَا النَّضْرُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ الْمُبَارَكِ ، قَالَ : حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عُثْمَانَ الْعِجْلِيُّ ، قَالَ : حَدَّثَنَا عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُوسَى ، عَنْ إِسْرَائِيلَ ، عَنْ أَبِي إِسْحَاقَ ، عَنِ الْبَرَاءِ ، قَالَ : " اعْتَمَرَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي ذِي الْقَعْدَةِ ، فَأَبَى أَهْلُ مَكَّةَ أَنْ يَدَعُوهَ أَنْ يَدْخُلَ مَكَّةَ حَتَّى قَاضَاهُمْ عَلَى أَنْ يُقِيمَ بِهَا ثَلاثَةَ أَيَّامٍ ، فَلَمَّا كَتَبُوا الْكِتَابَ كَتَبُوا هَذَا مَا قَاضَى عَلَيْهِ مُحَمَّدٌ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ، فَقَالُوا : لا نُقِرُّ بِهَذَا ، لَوْ نَعْلَمُ أَنَّكَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ مَا مَنَعْنَاكَ شَيْئًا ، وَلَكِنْ أَنْتَ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ، فَقَالَ : أَنَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ، وَأَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ، فَقَالَ لِعَلِيٍّ : امْحُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ، قَالَ : وَاللَّهِ لا أَمْحُوكَ أَبَدًا ، فَأَخَذَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ الْكِتَابَ

وَلَيْسَ يُحْسِنُ يَكْتُبُ ، فَأَمَرَ ، فَكَتَبَ

مَكَانَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ مُحَمَّدًا ، فَكَتَبَ هَذَا مَا قَاضَى عَلَيْهِ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ، أَنْ لا يَدْخَلَ مَكَّةَ بِالسِّلاحِ إِلا السَّيْفَ ، وَلا يَخْرُجُ مِنْهَا بِأَحَدٍ يَتْبَعُهُ ، وَلا يَمْنَعُ أَحَدًا مِنْ أَصْحَابِهِ إِنْ أَرَادَ أَنْ يُقِيمَ بِهَا ، فَلَمَّا دَخَلَهَا وَمَضَى الأَجَلُ أَتَوْا عَلِيًّا

و نقرا في صحيح مسلم كتاب الجهاد و السير باب صلح الحديبية
1783 حدثنا إسحق بن إبراهيم الحنظلي وأحمد بن جناب المصيصي جميعا عن عيسى بن يونس واللفظ لإسحق أخبرنا عيسى بن يونس أخبرنا زكرياء عن أبي إسحق عن البراء قال لما أحصر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم عند البيت صالحه أهل مكة على أن يدخلها فيقيم بها ثلاثا ولا يدخلها إلا بجلبان السلاح السيف وقرابه ولا يخرج بأحد معه من أهلها ولا يمنع أحدا يمكث بها ممن كان معه قال لعلي اكتب الشرط بيننا بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم هذا ما قاضى عليه محمد رسول الله فقال له المشركون لو نعلم أنك رسول الله تابعناك ولكن اكتب محمد بن عبد الله فأمر عليا أن يمحاها فقال علي لا والله لا أمحاها فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم

أرني مكانها فأراه مكانها فمحاها

وكتب ابن عبد الله .

و نقرا في السنن الكبرى للبيهقي كتاب النكاح
12916 باب لم يكن له أن يتعلم شعرا ولا يكتب قال الله تعالى: ( وما علمناه الشعر وما ينبغي له )
وقال: ( فآمنوا بالله ورسوله النبي الأمي ) قال بعض أهل التفسير: الأمي: الذي لا يقرأ الكتاب ، ولا يخط بيمينه . وهذا قول مقاتل بن سليمان ، وغيره من أهل التفسير .
( وأخبرنا ) أبو حازم الحافظ ، أنبأ أبو بكر الإسماعيلي ، ثنا علي بن سراج المصري ، ثنا محمد بن عبد الرحمن ، ابن أخي حسين الجعفي ، ثنا أبو أسامة ، عن إدريس الأودي ، عن الحكم بن عتيبة ، عن مجاهد ، عن عبد الله بن عباس - رضي الله عنهما - في قوله - عز وجل: ( وما كنت تتلو من قبله من كتاب ولا تخطه بيمينك ) ، قال:

لم يكن رسول الله - صلى الله عليه وسلم - يقرأ ، ولا يكتب

.

هذا مع الاخذ بعين الاعتبار ان التلمود ان كان متوفرا لدى يهود الجزيرة العربية (على عكس ما ذكره اسرائيل ولفنسون في النقطة الرابعة اعلاه) فانه لا يمكن الا ان يكون باللغة العبرية او السريانية او حتى الحبشية و ان كان احتمالا ضئيلا

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA :
What he received from the Jews was mixed with haggadic elements current orally among Arabian Jews or existing in written form [—

probably preserved in Ethiopic translations of Hebrew pseudepigraphic writings

.—K.];

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8263-islam

سادسا : التلمود بحد ذاته لم يكن متوفرا الا لكبار احبار اليهود و الدارسين منهم و ليس للعوام منهم فكيف يمكن لامي عربي ان يصل الى التلمود و يقتبس منها :

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية :
it became an encyclopedia of Jewish faith and scholarship, c

omprising whatsoever the greatest representatives of Judaism in Palestine and in Babylon had regarded as objects of study and investigation and of teaching and learning, during the three centuries which elapsed from the conclusion of the Mishnah to the completion of the Talmud itself.

When the Mishnah, with the many ancient traditions to which it had given rise since the latter centuries of the Second Temple, was incorporated into the Talmud as its text-book,

the Talmud became a record of the entire epoch which was represented by the Jewish schools of Palestine and Babylon, and which served as a stage of transition from the Biblical period to the later aspect of Judaism

. Although the Talmud is an academic product and may be characterized in the main

as a report (frequently with the accuracy of minutes) of the discussions of the schools, it also sheds a flood of light on the culture of the people outside the academies

. The interrelation between the schools and daily life, and the fact that neither teachers nor pupils stood aloof from that life, but took part in it as judges, instructors, and expounders of the Law, caused the Talmud to represent even non-scholastic affairs with an abundance of minute details, and made it an important source for the history of civilization. Since, moreover, the religious law of the Jews dealt with all the circumstances of life, the Talmud discusses the most varied branches of human knowledge—astronomy and medicine, mathematics and law, anatomy and botany—thus furnishing valuable data for the history of science also.
.....

The Talmud has been made the subject or the starting-point of a large portion of this widely ramified literature, which has been the product of the intellectual activity induced by its study, and to which both scholars in the technical sense of the word and also a large number of the studious Jewish laity have contributed

. The same faculties which had been exercised in the composition of the Talmud were requisite also for the study of it;

the Talmud therefore had an exceedingly stimulating influence upon the intellectual powers of the Jewish people, which were then directed toward other departments of knowledge

. It is a noteworthy fact that the study of the Talmud gradually
became a religious duty, and thus developed into an intellectual activity having no ulterior object in view. Consequently it formed a model of study for the sake of study.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14213-talmud

نقرا من كتاب التلمود اصله و تسلسله و ادابه الصفحة الثامنة

file:///Users/MacbookPro/Downloads/مكتبة نور - التلمود أصله وتسلسله وآدابه.pdf

نقرا في الشفا بتعريف حقوق المصطفى الجزء الاول :
(( فصل السابع : الإخبار عن القرون السالفة الوجه الرابع :

ما أنبأ به من أخبار القرون السالفة ، والأمم البائدة ، والشرائع الداثرة ، مما كان لا يعلم منه القصة الواحدة إلا الفذ من أحبار أهل الكتاب الذي قطع عمره في تعلم ذلك ، فيورده النبي - صلى الله عليه وسلم - على وجهه ، ويأتي به على نصه ، فيعترف العالم بذلك بصحته ، وصدقه ، وأن مثله لم ينله بتعليم .

وقد علموا أنه - صلى الله عليه وسلم - أمي لا يقرأ ، ولا يكتب ، ولا اشتغل بمدارسة ، ولا مثافنة ، ولم يغب عنهم ، ولا جهل حاله أحد منهم

.

وقد كان أهل الكتاب كثيرا ما يسألونه - صلى الله عليه وسلم - عن هذا ، فينزل عليه من القرآن ما يتلو عليهم منه ذكرا ، كقصص الأنبياء مع قومهم

، وخبر موسى ، والخضر ، ويوسف ، وإخوته ، وأصحاب الكهف ، وذي القرنين ، ولقمان وابنه ، وأشباه ذلك من الأنباء ، وبدء الخلق ، وما في التوراة ، والإنجيل ، والزبور ، وصحف إبراهيم ، وموسى ، مما صدقه فيه العلماء بها ، ولم يقدروا على تكذيب ما ذكر منها ، بل أذعنوا لذلك ، فمن موفق آمن بما سبق له من خير ، ومن شقي معاند حاسد ، ومع هذا لم يحك عن واحد من النصارى ، واليهود على شدة عداوتهم له ، وحرصهم على تكذيبه ، وطول احتجاجه عليهم بما في كتبهم ، وتقريعهم بما انطوت عليه مصاحفهم ، وكثرة سؤالهم له - صلى الله عليه وسلم - ، وتعنيتهم إياه عن أخبار أنبيائهم ، وأسرار علومهم ، ومستودعات سيرهم ، وإعلامه لهم بمكتوم شرائعهم ، ومضمنات كتبهم ، مثل سؤالهم عن الروح ، وذي القرنين ، وأصحاب الكهف ، وعيسى ، وحكم الرجم ، وما حرم إسرائيل على نفسه ، وما حرم عليهم من الأنعام ، ومن طيبات أحلت لهم فحرمت عليهم ببغيهم . ))

**محمد سني 1989** · 13-06-2019, 01:50

الجزء الثامن : طول ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام .

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

نقرا من صحيح مسلم كتاب الجنة و صفة نعيمها و اهلها باب يدخل الجنة أقوام أفئدتهم مثل أفئدة الطير
2841 حدثنا محمد بن رافع حدثنا عبد الرزاق أخبرنا معمر عن همام بن منبه قال هذا ما حدثنا به أبو هريرة عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فذكر أحاديث منها وقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم خلق الله عز وجل آدم على صورته طوله ستون ذراعا فلما خلقه قال اذهب فسلم على أولئك النفر وهم نفر من الملائكة جلوس فاستمع ما يجيبونك فإنها تحيتك وتحية ذريتك قال فذهب فقال السلام عليكم فقالوا السلام عليك ورحمة الله قال فزادوه ورحمة الله قال فكل من يدخل الجنة على صورة آدم وطوله ستون ذراعا فلم يزل الخلق ينقص بعده حتى الآن

يدعي اعداء الاسلام اليوم من الملاحدة و المنصرين ان طول ادم عليه الصلاة و السلام الوارد في الحديث الصحيح اعلاه مقتبس من كتب يهودية متاخرة و هي مجرد كتب تفسيرية تحتوي على الاساطير لا اقل و لا اكثر

و الحقيقة عكس ذلك اذ ان المتتبع للمصادر التي يدعون اقتباس القران منها لا تخلو ان تكون :

مصادر جمعت بشكل اولي قبل الاسلام بزمن بسيط و لكنها تعرضت لاضافات و تنقيحات كثيرة لقرون امتدت الى فترة ما بعد الاسلام الا ان لها تراث شفهي يمتد الى زمن الانبياء عليهم الصلاة و السلام

.

و المصدر الذي يدعي هؤلاء الاقتباس منه هو :
التلمود

و نسذكر الان النصوص المدعاة للاقتباس من التلمود :

تلمود شاقيقاه 12a:
As Rabbi Elazar said: The height of Adam the first man reached from the ground to the skies, as it is stated: “Since the day that God created man upon the earth, and from one end of the heavens” (Deuteronomy 4:32). When he sinned, the Holy One, Blessed be He, placed His hand upon him and diminished him, as it is stated: “You fashioned me behind and before, and laid Your hand upon me” (Psalms 139:5). Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: The size of Adam the first man was from one end of the world to the other, as it is stated: “Since the day that God created man upon the earth, and from one end of the heavens to the other,” which indicates that he spanned the entire length of the world. Once he sinned, the Holy One, Blessed be He, placed His hand upon him and diminished him, as it states: “And laid Your hand upon me.” The Gemara asks: If so, the two parts of the verse contradict each other, since one indicates that his height reached the heavens while the other says it reached the end of the earth. The Gemara answers: Both this and that are one, the same, measure.

https://www.sefaria.org/Chagigah.12a.2-4?lang=en

تلمود سنهدرين 38b:
Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: Adam the first man spanned from one end of the world until the other, as it is stated: “Since the day that God created man upon the earth, and from the one end of heaven unto the other” (Deuteronomy 4:32), meaning that on the day Adam was created he spanned from one end of the heavens until the other. Once Adam sinned, the Holy One, Blessed be He, placed His hand on him and diminished him, as it is stated: “Behind and before You have created me and laid Your hand upon me” (Psalms 139:5), that at first Adam spanned “behind and before,” meaning everywhere, and then God laid His hand on him and diminished him. Rabbi Elazar says: The height of Adam the first man was from the ground until the firmament, as it is stated: “Since the day that God created man upon the earth, and from the one end of heaven unto the other.” Adam stood “upon the earth” and rose to the end of the heavens. Once Adam sinned, the Holy One, Blessed be He, placed His hand on him and diminished him, as it is stated: “Behind and before You have created me and laid Your hand upon me.”

https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.38...h=all&lang2=en

و للرد نقول :

اولا : ان دعوى الاقتباس هنا قائمة على اساس باطل الا و هي دعوى ان التلمود كله باطل و مجرد عمل متاخر يحتوي على الخرافات و الحقيقة هي ان التلمود و ان بدا تدوينه في القرن الثاني الميلادي الا انه تجميع لتراث شفهي يرجع بعضه الى زمن السبي او حتى ما قبل السبي بقول النقاد

و تتضح اهميته الجلية عند اليهود في اطلاقهم عليه تسمية " التوراة الشفهية" فالتلمود عندهم يعتبر اهم المصادر بعد التناخ (العهد القديم) حيث يضم المشناة و الهاجاداه و يعتبر عندهم بقية علوم الانبياء التي لم يتم تدوينها في اسفار العهد القديم و تم تناقلها شفهيا .

بمعنى اخر يمكننا ان نقول ان التلمود يمثل التراث الشفهي اليهودي الممتد من فترة السبي و ما قبله الى قرون تالية .

نقرا من الموسوعة اليهودية JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA:

As early as the third century Joshua ben Levi interpreted Deut. ix. 10 to mean that the entire Law, including Miḳra, Mishnah, Talmud, and Haggadah, had been revealed to Moses on Sinai

(Yer. Pes. 17a, line 59; Meg. 74d, 25), while in Gen. R. lxvi. 3 the blessings invoked in Gen. xxvii. 28 are explained as "Miḳra, Mishnah, Talmud, and Haggadah." The Palestinian haggadist Isaac divided these four branches into two groups: (1) the Miḳra and the Haggadah, dealing with subjects of general interest; and (2) the Mishnah and the Talmud, "which can not hold the attention of those who hear them" (Pesiḳ. 101b; see Bacher, "Ag. Pal. Amor." ii. 211)
....

The history of the origin of the Talmud is the same as that of the Mishnah—a tradition, transmitted orally for centuries,

was finally cast into definite literary form, although from the moment in which the Talmud became the chief subject of study in the academies it had a double existence, and was accordingly, in its final stage, redacted in two different forms. The Mishnah of Judah I. was adopted simultaneously in Babylon and Palestine as the halakic collection par excellence; and at the same time the development of the Talmud was begun both at Sepphoris, where the Mishnah was redacted, and at Nehardea and Sura, where Judah's pupils Samuel and Rab engaged in their epoch-making work. The academies of Babylon and of Palestine alike regarded the study of the Mishnah and its interpretation as their chief task. The Amoraim, as the directors and members of these academies were called ( see Amora), became the originators of the Talmud; and its final redaction marked the end of the amoraic times in the same way that the period of the Tannaim was concluded by the compilation of the Mishnah of Judah I. Like the Mishnah, the Talmud was not the work of one author or of several authors, but was the result of the collective labors of many successive generations, whose toil finally resulted in a book unique in its mode of development.
......
After the completion of the Talmud as a work of literature, it exercised a twofold influence as a historical factor in the history of Judaism and its followers, not only in regard to the guidance and formulation of religious life and thought, but also with respect to the awakening and development of intellectual activity.