الرد على شبهة اقتباس القران قصة 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.
http://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" (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...
http://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 .

موضوع ذو صلة :
http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/t183955-2.html

هذا وصلى الله على سيدنا محمد و على اله وصحبه وسلم