Praise be to Allah , we thank Him, we ask for His help, guidance and forgiveness,
I often read criticisms for issues of Creed, Sunnah (prophetic traditions) or Islamic law (Shari'ah) on internet sites. Whenever I meditate into the words of this criticizing person, I find that he does not comprehend the matter which he criticizes. This problem in perceiving matters is the origin of erring in judging and criticizing matters. I am definite that many rational persons, whom I encountered in my life, who showed antagonism to Islam in general or some of its issues if issues were illustrated to them, properly, you will find them agreeing with us. In other words, the great gap which they see between us and them would be minimized, so that they would get closer to us. At least, the minimum I obtain when I talk with the opposing side is that I snatch from him respect and appreciation for Islam and its law and recognition that its issues and matters of accountability are not something absurd that can be rebutted or even criticized from the very beginning.
Anyway this talk had many aspects to consider
The purpose of writing this article is to concentrate on the linguistic miracle aspect in the Holy Quran and to present it in a simplified form for those who do not absorb it due to their lack of knowledge of Arabic or their not appreciating its beauty features.
Let's try to understand: why language?
(1)
The first question: Why?
It is known that Quran was revealed in the language of Arabs in terms of words, phrases and structures; however, no Arab eloquent orator or Arab fluent Bedouin rises to challenge and compete with Quran and they were all satisfied with incompetence.
This is despite the fact that the voice of Quran was calling above them for challenge.
In addition, response to challenge is inherent in man's instinct.
Despite the fact that these Arabs were renowned for pride and dignity and they never experienced humiliation and no occupant enemy dominate their countries throughout their vast history.
Despite all this they did not accept the challenge of Quran and they met the new call by sword and endured for the sake of this the killing of men and enslavement of women, death of children and orphaning of children.
But…
Why language?
In order to understand this question, we must know that there are conditions that are to be fulfilled in the concluding miracle:
Condition of man universality
Condition of time universality
Condition of place universality
The miracle of the last prophet must reach everybody, to every named one of humankind and Jinn. The argument does not apply equally on everybody unless they all performed equally.
It is logical that the one who saw the verse closely is not like that who saw it from a distance, and the one who inspected it is not like the one who heard about it and who practiced it is not like who did not.
From the divine justice viewpoint concerning the guidance of the revelation, equality among everyone is a necessity as God has the perfect evidence, while these evidence of people are refutable before their God.
It is imperative that the concluding miracle not being confined to a place rather than another for it was otherwise, violation of man universality condition would occur because the argument is based on who is here rather than who is there.
From this view as well the time statement: the concluding miracle should continue from its revelation till the end of time or more precisely till another era assigned in this life.
What is the miracle which would fulfill these three conditions together?
Whatever we think of the assumption and reconsider the possibility we would not go beyond "language".
If the miracle resembled that of Moses's stick or the dead revivification, it would violate the condition of place universality for it would have happened in a single place, and the condition of time universality as it would have occurred in a limited time as well as the condition of man universality because all would not approach it on the basis of place and time limitation.
However, consider Quran as it belongs to the language gender so it fulfilled all conditions.
It is recited here and there
It is recited today and tomorrow, here and there
It is recited by each and every one today and tomorrow, here and there.
We must at this point be aware of an important feature in language:
Language belongs to every same person and maybe it is the only thing equally distributed between the young and the old, woman, man, Bedouin and rural.
Accordingly, consider the challenge universality in Quran. If it were a scientific matter, it would be said that it is confined to scientists and if it belonged to a given skill, it would be asserted that it is assigned to those with this kind of skill.
However, challenge was in the language known by the old and mastered by the young.
This is the universality of man which was fulfilled in the eternal miracle of Quran. If the concluding miracle belonged to a scientific kind such as an atomic weapon or an unconventional machine in the past, then the miracle holder challenged his folk, would this be a proper challenge?
No!
For the challenge here is relative. It is right that some people would believe considering that the miracle has occurred before their eyes. However, this same miracle in our views – we the contemporaries- is not like this and some of us can achieve the like, a better one or a closer one to it, is not that so?
(2)
The Argument of Priority
On the challenge verse in El-Baqarah Chapter , we read almighty saying:
{ وَإِن كُنتُمْ فِي رَيْبٍ مِّمَّا نَزَّلْنَا عَلَى عَبْدِنَا فَأْتُواْ بِسُورَةٍ مِّن مِّثْلِهِ وَادْعُواْ شُهَدَاءكُم مِّن دُونِ اللّهِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ صَادِقِينَ فَإِن لَّمْ تَفْعَلُواْ وَلَن تَفْعَلُواْ فَاتَّقُواْ النَّارَ الَّتِي وَقُودُهَا النَّاسُ وَالْحِجَارَةُ أُعِدَّتْ لِلْكَافِرِينَ }
"And if ye are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to Our servant, then produce a Chapter) like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers (If there are any) besides Allah, if your (doubts) are true. But if ye cannot- and of a surety ye cannot- then fear the Fire whose fuel is men and stones,- which is prepared for those who reject Faith."
http://www.muslimaccess.com/quraan/arabic/002.asp
What a colossal verse!
(إن كنتم في ريب ... فأتوا ..) و(إن لن تفعلوا... فاتقوا ..)+
"If ye are in doubt … , then produce…" and " and of a surety ye cannot- then fear"
The concept of the condition in the first clause means that whoever is unable to produce such chapter will not have any cynicism or skepticism.
However, what if man was unable to produce such Chapter, and then he would say: If I were unable, then maybe another person would be able to do it. In other words, if people were unable today, it is possible that others would be able to perform this task in the coming eras.
Doesn't this cause skepticism again? How can we compromise between this and refuting doubt due to a mere personal incompetence to produce such chapter of Quran as understood by the verse?
Every believer of Quran thinks that the challenge of Quran is absolute for the creation universality and not relative.
Then there is another issue, the parenthetical clause (وَلَن تَفْعَلُواْ): (" and of a surety ye cannot") sustain negation by the use of
(َلَن ) "Cannot" denotes absolute negation. In other words, it means neither humankind nor jinn can produce such chapter in all future times.
A believer of Quran has no doubt in the seriousness of Almighty Allah concerning what He said. However, the challenge here is addressed to the doubtful infidel. It does not make sense that Quran brings the answer itself and builds on it without hearing from the disbeliever first! The challenging infidel must have a belief of the inability of man – not him or another- to produce such Quran. This belief should come from another source rather than Quran. On the other hand, this belief should eliminate all doubt and, according to its very clause, future ability to respond to challenge someday, somewhere.
Without all of this, there won't be a real challenge.
Well!
We said that any miracle other than language is not suitable to be a subject for the challenge produced by Quran for it is the only thing which all people practice, know and appreciate and it is not confined to a class rather than the other.
There is another characteristic of the language which is not shared by another. It is the prime key in all our inferences: Language is the only thing where one cannot imagine or accept in it that the successor will surpass the predecessor.
It is true that the successor may be better informed than the predecessor, policies of the successor may be more ongoing than the predecessor’s, the age of the successor may be longer that that of the predecessor … etc, But: Definitely and unquestionably, the successor cannot precede the predecessor in language, which he, I mean the latter, invented and taught the former!
Note that I am not talking about the evolution of language as the successor can change the language partly or wholly as has happened here in the so-called dialects, and as happened in Latin when French, Spanish and Italian were derived from it. Nevertheless, what is generated from derivation and distortion is not considered as a language of the ancestors.
I speak about Oratory (eloquence) which is another thing. I consider Umru-ul-Qais Kais as more eloquent than a thousand Ibn Taymiyya, despite that fact that the first is infidel and unbeliever and Ibn Taymiyya is the knowledgeable scholar of Islam and a sect reviver, besides, an old Bedouin woman from the Arabian desert during the pre-Islamic age is more eloquent and knowledgeable than Almutannabi who was renowned worldwide and occupied people minds with his eloquent poetry.
The secret in this is that language is mainly vocabulary whose meanings were agreed upon and used within agreed con****s and terms. Time elapse would cause forgetfulness of some meanings or add up new meanings and in both cases; the language becomes either poorer or distorted. But the miracle of Quran is that it stopped and prevented the Arabic language from evolving and developing; for our language today is the same language of pre-Islamic time (compare this with the French for example who translate the French language of Rawunsar who lived in the thirteenth century to the French of Sartre)
The Great Imam" Malik Ibn Anas “said, in his methodological saying something which we should willingly adopt and abide by:
(( what was not considered "religion” at that time, should not be considered religion nowadays too)), and I also follow suit and say: what was not then considered as an Arabic language should not be taken today as an Arabic language".
If the addressees were unable to bring such a Chapter of the Quran, then those who came after them (successors) would be thus more unable, since we have established that a language originator is more eloquent than that who isn’t. In addition, a teacher is more informed than the student. We can not also consider that some non-Arabs excelled the language and surpassed their teachers such as Siebawayh, al-Zamkhshari and others because we say they excelled due to their knowledge of other language sources and not due to their mental capabilities or intelligence. For, language matters have nothing to do with intelligence!
The challenging person in the two verses of Baqarah Chapter is definite that mankind cannot obtain such Quran in future based on the rational basic of syllogism: The successor's inability is more likely / logical than that of the predecessor’s who invented or originated. ..
This would negate any likelihood of the possibility that successors would be able to do what predecessors failed to.
According to this syllogism, the argument was set for everyone, for those well informed of the Arabic language became in a fix when the inability of their predecessors was established. So, the non-Arabs in turn can not claim their ability if the Arabs themselves failed! Thus, all routes to claims are closed. This is the absolute reality for any one who is not supercilious
(3)
A Slander and a response:
an old yet new slander is still being narrated by people of different tongues denoting that the miracle of the Quran was addressed to the Arabs not on non-Arabs as the non-Arabs do not practice nor appreciate the Quran language. This refutes what we mentioned concerning the universality of mankind.
Some would suggest the scientific miracle approach as an alternative to this "deficiency" in the rhetoric miracle!
Our answer thus is based on many aspects:
First: we do not take for granted that the non-Arab cannot appreciate the eloquence of Quran, but we say it may be possible. An example of this is what Abdullah Yusuf Ali mentioned in the footnote no. 22 regarding "Show us the straight way "(أهدنا الصراط المستقيم)
((If we translate by the English word "guide," we shall have to say: Guide us to an in the straight Way." For we may be wandering aimlessly, and the first step is to find the Way; and the second need is to keep in the Way: our own wisdom may fail in either case. )), for even in this path we still need guidance. These are but some of the intricate meanings of Qur’an which need to be delivered to non-Arabs.
This is exactly what proponents of the scientific miracles of Qur’an try to convey. They translate the word to foreign languages and show its meaning and miraculous aspects for non-Arabs without the necessity of having the non Arabic speaker appreciate the word or being capable of deducing its miraculous features.
Second
The non appreciation of the Quran language by a non-Arab does not mean that its miracle is not an argument against him. The truth of matter is that it is a rational argument for it by priority syllogism and the evidence is : if the eloquent and fluent were proven to be unable to object to the Quran and admitted its miracle and that it goes beyond mankind speech, then we would know that it is far more miraculous for those who are not as eloquent! Exactly like when a strong boxer beats another of the same weight and size, then it is automatically understood that a woman from the audience would not be able to stand him.
This second aspect is our same reply to those who attempt to obtain what they believe in as an objection to Quran. If the eloquent and fluent were unable, how would the non-eloquent succeed? So, if the non eloquent claimed to be eloquent and fluent, we would refute him because the Arabic language, as an expression and communication was a faculty and an instinct for Arabs in Arabian peninsula (Jazira), and when Islam came and drove them out from this area and they intermingle with non-Arabs, this faculty got gradually weakened till it was completely distorted and language became acquired through learning and education. Thus , whoever wishes to be an eloquent as El-Jazira Arabs, he must learn this language from all its sources till he gets through learning to acquire what was their faculty and an instinct, then . If he learns all language sciences of Arabs, he could then start to object to Quran and not before acquiring this.
Third
This is another feature of the rhetoric (eloquence) argument over non-Arabs and its institutionalization is that:
People of each art are the ones who should determine its matters. If doctors agreed unanimously that a certain disease is incurable, their unanimity would be considered as evidence for everyone; whether a doctor or not. It does not make sense that someone would come claiming that he alone could heal that disease and not doctors or specialists. Likewise, if the eloquent and the fluent people agreed that Quran is miraculous in its rhetoric and eloquence, then, their unanimity would be as evidence for the universal mankind.
This was stated in Sahih Muslim about Allah’s messenger (PBUH) that he said: I swear to Allah who hath control of the life of Mohamed that: if someone from this nation should hear about me, be it a Jew or Christian, then dies not believing in what I have been sent with, he would belong to the people sentenced to Hell.
The Hadith:
It is narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) observed: By Him in Whose hand is the life of Muhammad, he who amongst the community of Jews or Christians hears about me, but does not affirm his belief in that with which I have been sent and dies in this state (of disbelief), he shall be but one of the denizens of Hell-Fire. (Translation of Sahih Muslim by Abdul Hamid Siddiqui)
The phrase (not hearing about me): came by its very words in the narration of Muslim, El-Bieyhaqy and El-Taialsy as the focus of the argument should be a mere hearing as illustrated by the apparent meaning of the (prophet saying)
The words لايسمع بي ) : hears of me ( means that a Jewish or a Christian hears, whatever their languages may be, that a man has challenged his people in their languages and by their languages and they proved to be incompetent; therefore, the argument is proven true against them rationally considering the above-mentioned.
The inability of eloquent and the fluent to accept the challenge of Quran was proven, they did not object but rather admitted. Native speakers of Arabic knew its miracle by instinct and scientists knew it by their skill in the art of rhetoric and laymen knew it by the testimonies of all these. Thus, it was definitely proven miraculous. So, if someone appeared nowadays - whose opinion is not a reference - claiming that he could refute this unanimity, we would say to him: you cannot do this; you do not belong to the eloquent so that your opinion can be taken into account, let alone this unanimity.
We have known so well the enemies of Islam who are considered the worst enemies of the Arabic language, and from the Christians, infidels and secularists, and we found that they do not belong originally to the eloquent Arabic mother tongue. Moreover, their speech is filled with naive colloquialism and often they cannot distinguish between the two letters (ه) and (ة), the tenses whether present or past and the five vowels letters; let alone the eloquent and the most eloquent (superlative and comparative forms).
NEXT- Wakid Ibn Al Mugheerah Statement ....Stay Tuned
