Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
The Qur'an is the mu'ajizaa (miracle) shown at the hands of Muhammad (saw)
proving his prophethood. It's 'ijaaz (miraculousness) lies in it's Arabic
construction, that is it's eloquence (balaagha). Knowing the Qur'an's
origination from the Creator means knowing it's eloquence is not in man's
ability to match. It could be said that such a fact is not within the
ability of the 'ajamee (non-Arab) to comprehend and hence it cannot be used
as a proof against them. However this assertion is fallacious and
superficial. Differentiation between 'ajamee and Arab has neither proof nor
relevance here. Rather the knowledge of balaa'gha (eloquence) and it's
sciences is something not widely known to the Arabs (that is the common
Arabs) let alone the 'ajamee. Hence the verification of the mu'jizaa is not
a new problem but rather has existed since the time of the prophet (saw) and
his companions. Furthermore during the time of the companions lands were
conquered which were inhabited, in the most, by 'ajamee people, yet they
embraced Islam in their masses. This is true with the fact that the Sahaabah
propagated the Islamic 'Aqeedah with definite proofs. Hence the miracle of
the Qur'aan is capable of being grasped by non-Arabs in a definite manner.
However the confusion does not rest upon this point but rather a rational
point. That is the discussion regarding what constitutes valid proof and
what doesn't. It is assumed, by those that ask the question, that only
direct knowledge or perception of the miracle yields yaqeen (certatinty),
that is only understanding directly the miraculousness by knowing Arabic and
it's sciences.
This is void. Rational thought is composed of previous information, mind,
senses and reality. Whenever these exist judgement is possible. So thought
is something meaningful that corresponds to a reality which is itself
perceptible or which is perceptible from something other than it. Allaah's
(swt) existence, for example, is not perceptible in itself but rather is
definitely known from man, life and the universe. As regards the question
specifically it is true that the miraculousness lies in its Arabic usage
however it cannot be inferred from this that the sensation of this lies only
with in itself, knowing the Qur'an words itself and comprehending its
language deeply (i.e. knowing it's sciences).
This is since the fact, it's inimitability, is clearly perceptible from
other than it (other than the Qur'aan). That is through other perceptible
facts such as its (miraculousness) confirmation by those who comprehend the
language deeply, non-Muslim and Muslim. The non-Muslims say:
ON ITS WRITTEN FORM, THE QUR'AN HAS SET THE STANDARD FOR
ARABIC LANGUAGE AND
LITERATURE AS THE PROPER AND INDEED THE HIGHEST EXPRESSION OF
LITERARY
ARABIC." MIRCAEA ELIADE (EDITOR IN CHIEF), THE ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF
RELIGION,
VOLUME 12, MACMILLAN PUBLISHING COMPANY, 1987, P179
'IT HAS BEEN REALISED THAT THERE ARE VERY FEW WORDS IN
LANGUAGE WHICH ARE
SYNONYMOUS; IN THE QUR'AN THEY ARE RARE, ALMOST NON
EXISTENT,. IT IS VERY
DIFFICULT TO FIND A WORD WHICH CONVEYS ALL THE MEANINGS
WHICH ARE CONVEYED
BY ANOTHER WORD; AT BEST, IT WILL BE AN APPROXIMATION. THIS IS
ONE OF THE
REASONS WHY THE QUR'AN IS INIMITABLE. IN THE VERSE, "ON THE
DAY WHEN THE
FIRMAMENT WILL BE IN SWIFT COMMOTION (MAWR)." (52:9) FOR
EXAMPLE IF YOU
EXPLAIN THE WORD MAWR BY HARAKAH, MOVEMENT, THIS WOULD BE
AN APPROXIMATION;
FOR MAWR MEANS A LIGHT SWIFT MOVEMENT." SHAIKH UL ISLAAM
IBN TAYMIYYAH AN
INTRODUCTION INTO THE PRNCIPLES OF TAFSEER, AL HIDAYAH
PUBLISHING &
DISTIBUTION, PG 24
All these prove the fact that the Qur'an is inimitable. As regards the claim
that some of these quotes originate from Muslims whose testimony cannot be
trusted (due to bias). This is of no consequence. There are numerous
statements from the kaafir in different contexts which suffice to prove the
point. Besides these are only a fraction of what has been said. Moreover it
is false to discount the comments of the Muslims here, these comments have
great weighting hence they are proof. It is impossible for any report which
is witnessed in a widespread way to be fabricated. News reports, which are
usually heard through khabar Aa'haad (single narrator Hadith), which are
additionally da'eef (due to originating from kaafir known for lying and
distortion,), are known to be true on account of their being accessible to
multitudes of those who witness the same reported events, hence error in
them not possible. The Arabic construction of the Qur'an is perceptible in a
widespread way, hence it is not possible that such large numbers of people,
Muslim or otherwise, to fabricate such famous ideas in the presence of many
who witness the same subject matter. What proves this even more is that not
only is the event (miraculousness of the Qur'an) commonly reported but also
the details of the event in a high degree. That is the description of the
eloquence is commonly reported, this would not be possible if these were
fabricated. ( Hence if it was fabricated it would not be possible for all
numerous Muslim scholars to all describe and illustrate the miracle in
identical ways. They would not be able to describe style, meaning, grammar
and those sciences such as lexicography, syntax, grammatical devices and the
like and their examples in the Qur'an without discrepancy.)
In addition these statements can also be joined with other facts. For
example the fact that the Qur'aan is the reference point and highest
specimen of the language and linguistics and used as such in colleges and
universities in the Arab countries and abroad. It has been said that there
have been pieces of Arabic which have been proposed as meeting the
challenge. In addition it has been said that certain Muslim scholars have
regarded the challenge as beatable. With regards to what has been
said regarding the claimed challengable pieces then there are two points.
Firstly these pieces are, in their style and meaning, not comparable to the
Qur'an in small or in large pieces. This is known be those with skill in the
language. (All these 'pieces' are analysed linguistically in the books on
the miracle of the Qur'an like Baqillani's 'Ijaz ul Qur'an, hence they are
well known. What is more the disparity between the Qur'an and these pieces
are so large that even common Arabs (those who are not scholars in the
language) are able to remark on the difference.) A claim is in the ability
of anyone with any idea (i.e. any person can claim what he wants), they
are only proof for us if they can be demonstrated. These pieces are mere
claims and the language cannot be demonstrated to compare with that of the
Qur'an due to their poor level. As for the 'aammi (common Muslim.) then this
is easily known due to the level of evidence. That is that it has been
established by Tawaatur that the Qur'an is inimitable and that no one has
brought the like of it, this as all and sundry know is well known. These
facts are definite therefore any evidence that comes contrary to these must
necessarily be false. This is since, rationally, two definite things can
never contradict. (If this was believed that 2 definite things could
contradict then it would have to believe that an absurdity such as New York
definitely existing and definitely not existing at the same time was
possible). Consequently these narrations (which as we have discussed earlier
be shown to weak and fabricated in any case.) must be rejected outright
since they cannot with any possibility be true (Even entertaining the
possibility of a mutawaatir narration being disproved is irrational since it
means saying something definite can be disproved! If such a thing is said it
would mean entertaining the possibility of 1 + 1 = 2 being disproved or that
a narration can come to disprove the occurrence of World war II!).
This is all that is needed to disprove such allegations. Similarly the
second claim (that certain Muslim scholars regarded the Qur'aan's language
as matchable) is equally false. Such baseless understanding only results
from irrational thought or lack in intelligence. Such scholars belonged to
the Mu'atazila. Their opinion on miracles, generally, was that, when
accompanied by a challenge, were potentially within the ability of man.
This is through their understanding that Allaah (swt) is just hence if
Allaah (swt) was to challenge man then such a challenge must necessarily lie
within man's ability. Hence they formulated the doctrine of sarfa
(prevention). This means that certain actions are potentially within the
capability of man however Allaah (swt) prevents man from doing them after he
has challenged them to do it. This, as is the case with 'ilm ul kalaam
(theological rhetoric) is mere playing with words and semantics, the
view is essentially no different from the view of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamm'ah,
that is that a miracle an event beyond man's limitations. The only
difference lies in whether the limitation that prevents man from meeting the
challenge is inherent within man or rather imposed by Allaah (swt) after the
challenge. All this is evident if one consults their books. What even more
refutes the assertions is that many Mu'atazila scholars have written on
'ijaz ul Qur'an such as Qadi Abdul Jabbar's "Al Mughni fi abwab al-tawhid
wa'l-'adl" and Imaam Zamaksharee's "Kashaaf" in which they explain why the
language is unattainable for humans. Consequently there is no reality to
such claims, the truth of the matter is that these originate in certain
orientalist books (such as Golzheirs for example.). These cannot be trusted
due to their untrustorthyness and malice against the deen. Muslims who take
such information with trust are either low in intellect or harbor evil
intent.