الرد على شبهة اقتباس القران قصة كسر ابراهيم عليه الصلاة و السلام للاصنام والقائه في النار
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
قال تعالى : (( وَلَقَدْ آتَيْنَا إِبْرَاهِيمَ رُشْدَهُ مِن قَبْلُ وَكُنَّا بِهِ عَالِمِينَ (51) إِذْ قَالَ لِأَبِيهِ وَقَوْمِهِ مَا هَٰذِهِ التَّمَاثِيلُ الَّتِي أَنتُمْ لَهَا عَاكِفُونَ (52) قَالُوا وَجَدْنَا آبَاءَنَا لَهَا عَابِدِينَ (53) قَالَ لَقَدْ كُنتُمْ أَنتُمْ وَآبَاؤُكُمْ فِي ضَلَالٍ مُّبِينٍ (54) قَالُوا أَجِئْتَنَا بِالْحَقِّ أَمْ أَنتَ مِنَ اللَّاعِبِينَ (55) قَالَ بَل رَّبُّكُمْ رَبُّ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ الَّذِي فَطَرَهُنَّ وَأَنَا عَلَىٰ ذَٰلِكُم مِّنَ الشَّاهِدِينَ (56) وَتَاللَّهِ لَأَكِيدَنَّ أَصْنَامَكُم بَعْدَ أَن تُوَلُّوا مُدْبِرِينَ (57) فَجَعَلَهُمْ جُذَاذًا إِلَّا كَبِيرًا لَّهُمْ لَعَلَّهُمْ إِلَيْهِ يَرْجِعُونَ (58) قَالُوا مَن فَعَلَ هَٰذَا بِآلِهَتِنَا إِنَّهُ لَمِنَ الظَّالِمِينَ (59) قَالُوا سَمِعْنَا فَتًى يَذْكُرُهُمْ يُقَالُ لَهُ إِبْرَاهِيمُ (60) قَالُوا فَأْتُوا بِهِ عَلَىٰ أَعْيُنِ النَّاسِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَشْهَدُونَ (61) قَالُوا أَأَنتَ فَعَلْتَ هَٰذَا بِآلِهَتِنَا يَا إِبْرَاهِيمُ (62) قَالَ بَلْ فَعَلَهُ كَبِيرُهُمْ هَٰذَا فَاسْأَلُوهُمْ إِن كَانُوا يَنطِقُونَ (63) فَرَجَعُوا إِلَىٰ أَنفُسِهِمْ فَقَالُوا إِنَّكُمْ أَنتُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ (64) ثُمَّ نُكِسُوا عَلَىٰ رُءُوسِهِمْ لَقَدْ عَلِمْتَ مَا هَٰؤُلَاءِ يَنطِقُونَ (65) قَالَ أَفَتَعْبُدُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ مَا لَا يَنفَعُكُمْ شَيْئًا وَلَا يَضُرُّكُمْ (66) أُفٍّ لَّكُمْ وَلِمَا تَعْبُدُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ ۖ أَفَلَا تَعْقِلُونَ (67) قَالُوا حَرِّقُوهُ وَانصُرُوا آلِهَتَكُمْ إِن كُنتُمْ فَاعِلِينَ (68) قُلْنَا يَا نَارُ كُونِي بَرْدًا وَسَلَامًا عَلَىٰ إِبْرَاهِيمَ (69) وَأَرَادُوا بِهِ كَيْدًا فَجَعَلْنَاهُمُ الْأَخْسَرِينَ (70) وَنَجَّيْنَاهُ وَلُوطًا إِلَى الْأَرْضِ الَّتِي بَارَكْنَا فِيهَا لِلْعَالَمِينَ (71) وَوَهَبْنَا لَهُ إِسْحَاقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ نَافِلَةً ۖ وَكُلًّا جَعَلْنَا صَالِحِينَ (72) ))
يدعي المنصرون كذبا ان القران اقتبس قصة ابراهيم عليه الصلاة و السلام في كسره لاصنام ابيه والقائه في النار و نجاته منها 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 :
1.مصادر جمعت بشكل اولي قبل الاسلام بزمن بسيط و لكنها تعرضت لاضافات و تنقيحات كثيرة لقرون امتدت الى فترة ما بعد الاسلام
2.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 :
1. مدراش تكوين رباه (كسر الاصنام و النجاة من النار)
2. التلمود (النجاة من النار)
3. كتاب اليوبيلات الابوكريفي (هدم الاصنام ).
الرد :
اولا : بطلان دعوى الاقتباس من مدراش تكوين رباه .
النص المدعى للاقتباس :
مدراش تكوين رباه الفصل 39 :
Now what precedes this passage? And Terah died in Haran (Gen 11:32), which is followed by Now the Lord said unto Abram: Get thee (Lekh Lekha). R. Isaac said: From the point of view of chronology a period of 65 years is still required. But first you may learn that the wicked, even during their lifetime, are called dead. For Abraham was afraid, saying: “Shall I go out and bring dishonor upon the Divine Name, as people will say, ‘He left his father in his old age and departed’?” Therefore the Holy One, blessed be He, reassured him: “I exempt thee (Lekha) from the duty of honoring thy parents, though I exempt no one else from this duty. Moreover, I will record his death before thy departure.” Hence And Terah died in Haran is stated first, and then, Now the Lord said unto Abraham,
دعوى الاقتباس مردود و السبب :
ثانيا : بطلان حجة طعنهم الاقتباس من التلمود .اقتباسمدراش 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 :https://www.sefaria.org/Bereishit_Rabbah?lang=en
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.
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:https://www.encyclopedia.com/religio...genesis-rabbah
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.
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 للاقتباسhttps://www.encyclopedia.com/religio...genesis-rabbah
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.
النص المدعى الاقتباس منه
نقرا من تلمود Pesachim 118 a :And some say that the angel Gabriel recited: “And the truth of the Lord endures forever.” This Gemara elaborates: When the evil Nimrod threw our father, Abraham, into the fiery furnace, Gabriel said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, I will descend and cool the furnace, and I will thereby save the righteous Abraham from the fiery furnace. The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to him: I am unique in my world and Abraham is still unique in his world. It is fitting for the unique to save the unique. Therefore, God Himself went down and saved him. And as the Holy One, Blessed be He, does not withhold reward from any creature who sought to perform a good deed, He said to Gabriel: You will merit the rescue of three of his descendants under similar circumstances.
https://www.sefaria.org/Pesachim.118...h=all&lang2=en
و دعوى الاقتباس هنا مردودة لاكثر من وجه :
اولا : ن 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 .
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 .اقتباسنقرا 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.http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14213-talmud
......
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
اقتباس
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).http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14213-talmud
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...12505-rabina-i
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.
http://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.
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.http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14213-talmud
ثالثا : الجزم بالاقتباس باطل هنا نظرا لعدم توفر اي مخطوطة للتلمود اليوم يعود تاريخها لما قبل الاسلام .
رابعا : 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 .اقتباس
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 basedhttp://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.http://web.nli.org.il/sites/nlis/en/...munich_95.aspx
نقرا من كتاب تاريخ اليهود في بلاد العرب لاسرائيل ولفنسون الصفحة 13
يتبع
رد مع اقتباس
المفضلات