No one can change the words of God! (Part 2)

See Part 1 here. 

هیچ کس نمی تواند کلام خدا را تبدیل بدهد

(Farsi for “No one is able to change the word of God”)

Arabic:

وَلَا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِ اللَّهِ

“And there is no changing the words of Allah” (This phrase is from Surah 6:34, and see 6:115 (116); 10:64 (65); 18:27 below)

We have this same word and various forms of “change” from Arabic (مبدل and تبدیل )in Farsi.

We exhort and encourage Muslims to follow Surah 10:94 and ask the people who have been reading the previous Scriptures that came before Muhammad. On another blog, some time ago, I wrote an article on entitled The Qur’an Proves the Bible is True

Surah 10:94 says that Muhammad should go and ask the people who have been reading the Book الکتاب  ( Al-Kitab) before him. The Book, or Revelation from Allah “before him” is the Bible, both the OT and the NT. Surah 2:136 says that all of the Revelation given before Muhammad was revelation from God; the listing of prophets from Abraham to Moses to Jesus shows that this includes the OT and the NT; “we make no distinction” between the previous revelations and the current ones. Muhammad thought there was no contradiction. He misunderstood what the OT was and he misunderstood what the NT was. I did not write that the word “Injeel” was in the Arabic text of Surah 10:94, but it surely includes it in the meaning and intention because it came before and it clearly uses the word “before” قبل (again, we have this word in Farsi and I can see it. “From before you” = من قبلک

من = (min) = from; قبل = (qabl) = before; ک on the end = “you”

Surah 2:136:

قُولُوا آمَنَّا بِاللَّهِ وَمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْنَا وَمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَىٰ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ وَإِسْحَاقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ
وَالْأَسْبَاطِ وَمَا أُوتِيَ مُوسَىٰ وَعِيسَىٰ وَمَا أُوتِيَ النَّبِيُّونَ مِن رَّبِّهِمْ لَا نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّنْهُمْ وَنَحْنُ لَهُ مُسْلِمُونَ

Say ye: “We believe in Allah, and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Isma´il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) prophets from their Lord: We make no difference between one and another of them: And we bow to Allah (in Islam).”

It is obvious that the Qur’an thought the previous revelations were not corrupt and at least 4 other times it says, “No one can change the words of Allah”. (Surah 6:34; 6:115 (116); 10:64 (65); 18:27)

Surah 6:34:

وَلَقَدْ كُذِّبَتْ رُسُلٌ مِّن قَبْلِكَ فَصَبَرُوا عَلَىٰ مَا كُذِّبُوا وَأُوذُوا حَتَّىٰ أَتَاهُمْ نَصْرُنَا ۚ وَلَا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِ اللَّهِ ۚ وَلَقَدْ جَاءَكَ مِن نَّبَإِ الْمُرْسَلِينَ

Rejected were the messengers before thee: with patience and constancy they bore their rejection and their wrongs, until Our aid did reach them: there is none that can alter the words (and decrees) of Allah. Already hast thou received some account of those messengers.”

The Arabic phrase here is key and a theological truth that in principle Christians and Muslims can agree with: “there is no changing the words of Allah”

وَلَا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِ اللَّهِ

Surah 6:115 (or 116 depending on numbering of different Qur’an translations.)

وَتَمَّتْ كَلِمَتُ رَبِّكَ صِدْقًا وَعَدْلًا ۚ لَّا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِهِ ۚ وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ

“ The word of thy Lord doth find its fulfilment in truth and in justice: None can change His words: for He is the one who heareth and knoweth all.”

لَّا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِهِ
“No changing His words”

Surah 10:64 (or 65)

لَهُمُ الْبُشْرَىٰ فِي الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَفِي الْآخِرَةِ ۚ لَا تَبْدِيلَ لِكَلِمَاتِ اللَّهِ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ هُوَ الْفَوْزُ الْعَظِيمُ

For them are glad tidings, in the life of the present and in the Hereafter; no change can there be in the words of Allah. This is indeed the supreme felicity.

لَا تَبْدِيلَ لِكَلِمَاتِ اللَّهِ

“No change can there be in the words of Allah”

Surah 18:27:

وَاتْلُ مَا أُوحِيَ إِلَيْكَ مِن كِتَابِ رَبِّكَ ۖ لَا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِهِ وَلَن تَجِدَ مِن دُونِهِ مُلْتَحَدًا

And recite (and teach) what has been revealed to thee of the Book of thy Lord: none can change His Words, and none wilt thou find as a refuge other than Him.

لَا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِهِ

“No changing of His words”

Also, Surah 29:46 also says “Dispute not with the people of the book” . . . “But say, we believe in the Revelation which has come down to us and in that which has come down to you.”

وَلَا تُجَادِلُوا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ إِلَّا بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ إِلَّا الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا مِنْهُمْ ۖ وَقُولُوا آمَنَّا بِالَّذِي أُنزِلَ إِلَيْنَا وَأُنزِلَ إِلَيْكُمْ وَإِلَٰهُنَا وَإِلَٰهُكُمْ وَاحِدٌ وَنَحْنُ لَهُ مُسْلِمُونَ

“And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, “We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam).”

The people of the book are the Christians and the Jews. Surah 9:29-30 says this also. Many other verses in the Qur’an teach this.

I sincerely believe that the author (s) /compilers of the Qur’an and Muhammad misunderstood Christianity and that they really thought the previous revelations were not corrupted.   I am bringing forth evidence from the Qur’an itself that shows that at the time of Muhammad, he did not believe the Bible (OT and New Testament/ Injeel) was corrupt.

And Surah 29:46 exhorts Muslims to do better in the way they make arguments and stop calling people “liars” and “Islamophobes” when they don’t like Christians pointing out the problems with the Qur’an and Islamic doctrines and some Muslims bad behaviors.  Take responsibility for your own sins.  Repentance and faith in Jesus Christ, Jesus Al Masih is the only way to have eternal life.  (Mark 1:15; 10:45; Romans 3:19-26; Romans 9:9-10; John 14:6; Acts 4:12; 1 John 5:13)  All of those verses written from the true Injeel were written around 50 AD to 68 AD.  John’s writings could have been written in the 60s before 70 AD, or, as most scholars believe, from around 80 AD – 96 AD.  Since we have all the evidence for that and how old they are, and the Qur’an comes 600 years later and says “no one can change the word of God”, then the Qur’an affirms the Bible and Muslims must turn to it; and reject the parts of the Qur’an that disagree with the Bible.  It is not an inspired book, but it’s authors did think the Bible was inspired and not corrupted.

Obviously, Muhammad thought the revelations had the same basic message; and later, when Muslims began to study more of the details of the OT and the NT, as they fanned out in the conquering Jihads/Qatals/unjust, aggressive Wars, and they conquered more Byzantine areas and Christian areas in Mesopotamia (today’s Iraq), they realized that there are differences in the teachings, so it is then that they had to come up with the idea of “Tahreef” تحریف , that the text of the previous revelations have been corrupted. But the Qur’an itself never says this.

Advertisements

About Ken Temple

I am a follower of Jesus Christ. I am a sinner who has been saved by the grace of God alone (Ephesians 2:8-9), through faith alone (Galatians 2:16; Romans 3:28; 4:1-16), in Christ alone (John 14:6). But a true faith does not stay alone, it should result in change, fruit, good works, and deeper levels of repentance and hatred of my own sins of selfishness and pride. I am not better than you! I still make mistakes and sin, but the Lord is working on me, conforming me to His character. (Romans 8:28-29; 2 Corinthians 3:16-18) When I do sin, I hate the sin as it is an affront to God, and seek His forgiveness in repentance. (Mark 1:15; 2 Corinthians 7:7-10; Colossians 3:5-16 ) Praise God for His love for sinners (Romans 5:8), shown by the voluntary coming of Christ and His freely laying down His life for us (John 10:18), becoming flesh/human (John 1:1-5; 1:14; Philippians 2:5-8), dying for sins of people from all nations, tribes, and cultures (Revelation 5:9), on the cross, in history, rising from the dead (Romans 10:9-10; Matthew 28, Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24; John 20-21; 1 Corinthians chapter 15). His resurrection from the dead proved that Jesus is the Messiah, the eternal Son of God, the word of God from eternity past; and that He was all the gospels say He was and that He is truth and the life and the way to salvation. (John 14:6)
This entry was posted in Apologetics, Bible is not corrupted, Historical reliability of the Bible, Islam, Reliability of the Bible. Bookmark the permalink.

52 Responses to No one can change the words of God! (Part 2)

  1. Pingback: Debate: “Is Jesus only a prophet or is He also God?” (Sam Shamoun vs. Anjem Choudary) | Apologetics and Agape

  2. Pingback: The Qur’an Affirms the Bible | Apologetics and Agape

  3. Uthman rahimullah says:

    Even after Uthman’s ENGINEERED FABRICATION the abrogation of Quran still happens.

    The Muslim people has consensus to ABROGATE Surah 29:47 and Surah 22:57

    And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    While those who disbelieved and DENIED Our VERSES /revelations ( BI-AYATTINAA), for them will be a shameful doom”(S22:57)

    Here’s the problem, the alleged ‘remnant’ of Uthman’s Quran contains Basmalah as the first verse for every Surah

    The Maliki Sunnis REJECT VERSE of Basmalah as part of ANY CHAPTER IN QURAN except SURAH an-Naml ONLY

    Some Salafist REJECT VERSE of BASMALAH as THE FIRST VERSE IN ANY CHAPTER OF QURAN EXCEPT AL-FATIHA

    This means BY HUMAN CONSENSUS The Sunnis are ‘silently’ AGREE TO ABROGATE / ABOLISH THE RULING OF QURAN (S22:57 & S29:47)

  4. Uthman rahimullah says:

    Quran Abrogation BY CONSENSUS has been ‘SILENTLY PRACTICED’ in Islam from the beginning.

    Another BITTER DILEMMA is the ABROGATION OF TWO MUTAWATIR SURAHS IN UBAY IBN KAAB MUSHAF WITHOUT ANY CLEAR REASON WHY.

    The Two EXTRA Soorahs/Chapters are Surah Al-Khal’ and Surah Al-Hafd

    FACTS:
    1. Ubay ibn Kaab has strong positions in this matter:
    a. Ubay is the second referential by prophet himself ( in term as second line because he’s not equal to Mas’ud) especially since Salim the slave and Muadh ibn Jabal seemingly had passed away It is reported that the Messenger of Allah (saw) also said: “LEARN ( THE QURAN) from four people: ‘Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud, Salim the slave of Abu Hudhayfa, Ubay ibn Ka’b, and Mu’adh ibn Jabal (raa).” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Sunan al-Tirmidhi)

    b. Ubay is the personal writer of Muhammad, During the time of The Prophet (sallahAllaahu alayhi wasallam) , The Quran was collected by four , and all of them were from the Ansaar : Ubay ibn Ka’b, Muadh ibn Jabal, Zayd bin Yhabit, and Abu Zayd [Sahih Bukhari]

    2. THE MAJORITY of authoritative muslim leaders agree THE TWO EXTRA SURAHS are originally PART OF QURAN, based on
    a. AUTHENTIC NARRATION
    [ There is (AUTHENTIC) saheeh report from Ameer al-Mu’mineen ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allah be pleased with him) that he used to recite in his qunoot SOORAT AL-KHAL’ and SOORAT AL-HAFD in Fajr prayer, and that this qunoot may be called as-sooratayn.

    At-Tabari also narrated (1/353) with a saheeh(AUTHENTIC) isnaad from Ma‘bad ibn Sireen who said: I prayed Fajr behind ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allah be pleased with him) and he said qunoot after bowing, reciting these TWO SOORAHS.

    He also narrated (1/355) with a saheeh (AUTHENTIC)isnaad from ‘Abd ar-Rahmaan ibn Abza, who said: I prayed with ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allah be pleased with him) and he said qunoot, reciting the TWO SOORAHS.

    from islamqa.info website ]

    b. The term SOORAH is applied only to Quran and nothing else (we won’t find part of Hadith being called a Soorah).

    3. THE MAJORITY of muslim scholars agree, the TWO EXTRA SOORAHS WAS WRITTEN IN MUSHAF OF UBAY IBN KAAB

    As quoted from official Salafy website
    [ Az-Zarkashi said in al-Burhaan (2/37): The leading hadeeth scholar Abu’l-Husayn Ahmad ibn Ja‘far al-Manaadi said in his book an-Naasikh wa’l-Mansookh, concerning that which has been abrogated from the Qur’an but was not erased from what people had learned by heart, that this included the two soorahs that are recited in Qunoot in Witr prayer. He said: There is NO DIFFERENCE OPINION among THE EARLIER SCHOLARS that these TWO SOORAHS WERE WRITTEN DOWN IN THE MUSHAFS that were attributed to Ubayy ibn Ka‘b, and it was narrated from the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) that he recited them, and they were called the soorahs of al-Khal‘ and al-Hafd. End quote

    The most that may be said concerning this matter is that the du‘aa’ of Qunoot was part of the Qur’an in the beginning, then it was abrogated from the Holy Qur’an, but the text remained because all of the Sahaabah were using it. ]

    4. The TWO Soorahs are VALIDLY QURANIC and MUTAWATIR even until the time of Uthman , this means Umar nor Abu Bakar had not omitted the two soorahs from Quran.

    –TWO OTHER COMPANIONS Ibn ‘Abbas and Abu Musa al-Ashary also wrote the two surahs in their mushaf according to Imam as-Suyuti in his book the Al-Itqan Fi Ulum Al Quran.

    According to the Sunnah of Muhammad WHATEVER written in Mushaf is ABSOLUTELY QURANIC , Do not write anything from me except Quran. Anyone who wrote anything other than the Quran shall erase it.[Sahih Muslim and Musnad Ahmad]

    It’s is impossible especially for Ubay ibn Kaab to not know the prohibition for mixing non Quran text with Quran in a mushaf considering Ubay is MUHAMAD’S PERSONAL WRITER according to the hadith

    During the time of The Prophet (sallahAllaahu alayhi wasallam) , The Quran was collected by four , and all of them were from the Ansaar : Ubay ibn Ka’b, Muadh ibn Jabal, Zayd bin Yhabit, and Abu Zayd [Sahih Bukhari]

    5. There’s NO REASON EXCEPT ABROGATION BY SUNNA, for abolishing the two verses

    The Fact that Ubayy Ibn Kaab, and two other companions still had the two surahs within their mushaf proves Uthman had deliberately OMITTED Two VALID WORD OF ALLAH

    ….And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

  5. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: TWO OTHER COMPANIONS Ibn ‘Abbas and Abu Musa al-Ashary also wrote the two surahs in their mushaf according to Imam as-Suyuti ”

    Nobody knows what exactly the passage of either AlKhal’ or AlHafd may be, not even by Ibn Abbas who died in 687 CE during the time of Omayyad king Yazid.
    If the chapters were existent, after the time of Uthman was over Ibn Abbas must have had a chance to make known the passage (citation, words, amount of verse) of both AlKhal’ and AlHafd to Ali and Yazid.

  6. Uthman rahimullah says:

    ++If the chapters were existent, after the time of Uthman was over Ibn Abbas must have had a chance to make known the passage (citation, words, amount of verse) of both AlKhal’ and AlHafd to Ali and Yazid+++

    Apparently Ibn Abbas version is not ‘appealing’ enough to the mass , as we both know and agree Quranic verse can be ruled out and even abolished by the ‘consensus / taste’ of majority.

    The ‘Remnant ‘ of these Two Surah survive in the form of what muslim knows as The Qunut Prayer which by the way this prayer itself is still debatable on how to be conducted by muslim

  7. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: Apparently Ibn Abbas version is not ‘appealing’ enough to the mass”

    Yeah, it is possible its contents talked in details about a silliness of Abrogation Theory, perhaps?

  8. Uthman rahimullah says:

    θ says: Yeah, it is possible its contents talked in details about a silliness of Abrogation Theory, perhaps?

    I’m just telling the fact that you already know and acknowledge in your heart & mind.

    You surely fully aware the muslim people has ‘silent consensus to ABROGATE the Surah 29:47

    And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    Because Sunni muslims tolerate Maliki Sunni for REJECTING VERSE BASMALAH on Surah Fatiha and even rejecting it as first verse on every Chapter of Quran.

    The abrogation of Quran following the taste of majority is real. wake up and smell the coffee 🙂

  9. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: You surely fully aware the muslim people has ‘silent consensus to ABROGATE the Surah 29:47”

    What verse is it that may have possibly replaced or substituted two abrogated chapters? It is supposed to be a pair: Nasikh and Mansukh, isn’t it?
    Abrogation Theory never has a “substitution by a nothing” nonsense.

  10. Uthman rahimullah says:

    ++It is supposed to be a pair: Nasikh and Mansukh, isn’t it?++
    You yourself admit for not believing it

    second, just look the reality you surely admit the muslim people has ‘silent consensus to ABROGATE the Surah 29:47”

    …And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    Because Sunni muslims tolerate Maliki Sunni for REJECTING VERSE BASMALAH on Surah Fatiha and even rejecting it as first verse on every Chapter of Quran.

    Agree ? 🙂

  11. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: consensus to ABROGATE”

    Abrogation Theory never has a “substitution by a nothing” nonsense.

  12. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: Sunni muslims tolerate Maliki Sunni for REJECTING VERSE BASMALAH on Surah Fatiha”

    Sunni Moslems and Maliki Sunnis never tolerate anyone for trying to even doubt the Uthmani Mushaf and Mekkah’s Hafs dialect.

  13. Uthman rahimullah says:

    ++Abrogation Theory never has a “substitution by a nothing” nonsense.++
    Or you would rather call INTENTIONALLY VIOLATING THE QURAN for your convenience perhaps ?

    …And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    Because Sunni muslims tolerate Maliki Sunni for REJECTING VERSE BASMALAH on Surah Fatiha and even rejecting it as first verse on every Chapter of Quran.

    Why won’t you apply this verse to your dearly Maliki brother then ? 🙂

    Repent and Obey your Quran

  14. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: Why won’t you apply this verse to your dearly Maliki brother then ?”

    Both Malikis and Hanafis themselves believe that entire “parts” of Warsh and Qalun of Ka’b are just dialects.
    Sunni Moslems and Maliki Sunnis never tolerate anyone for trying to even doubt the Uthmani Mushaf and Mekkah’s Hafs dialect.

  15. Uthman rahimullah says:

    θ says:Both Malikis and Hanafis themselves believe that entire “parts” of Warsh and Qalun of Ka’b are just dialects.

    I know it’s such a painstaking thing to yourseLf when youare willingly make an idiot of yourself as possibly as you can to deny the truth by saying THE REJECTION OF ONE WHOLE ENTIRE VERSE IS JUST A DIALECT DIFFERENCES 🙂

  16. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: THE REJECTION OF ONE WHOLE ENTIRE VERSE IS JUST A DIALECT DIFFERENCES”

    Yes it is just a dialect difference, because there’s no difference whatsoever on accepting one Uthmani Mushaf.

  17. Uthman rahimullah says:

    ++Yes it is just a dialect difference++

    I know it’s must be very painful for you in this effort to make yourself as dumb as possible for saying THE DENYING OF ONE WHOLE ENTIRE VERSE IS JUST A DIALECT DIFFERENCES 😀

    …And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    Because Sunni muslims tolerate Maliki Sunni for REJECTING VERSE BASMALAH on Surah Fatiha and even rejecting it as first verse on every Chapter of Quran

    And this means THE ABROGATION OF THE RULING ON S29:47

  18. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: none REJECT Our VERSES ”

    Dialect is not a verse in Mushaf.

  19. Uthman rahimullah says:

    ++Dialect is not a verse in Mushaf.++

    What a very painful effort for you for willingly making yourself as dumb as possiblein saying THE DENYING OF ONE WHOLE ENTIRE VERSE IS JUST A DIALECT DIFFERENCES 😀

  20. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: THE DENYING OF ONE WHOLE ENTIRE VERSE”

    There’s no “verse” whatsoever in a dialect. Dialect in recitation is just like one single compact paragraph in writing.
    Dialect does not become a verse in Mushaf. “Verse” is just a term for Mushaf.

  21. Uthman rahimullah says:

    Taken from OFFICIAL ISLAMIC WEBSITE http://www.questionsonislam.com/question/basmala-bismillahirrahmanirrahim-name-allah-most-gracious-most-merciful-verse-quran

    [Question:
    Is Basmala (Bismillahirrahmanirrahim: In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful) A VERSE IN HTE QURAN ? If yes then Why some people do not recite it in prayers before surah al Fatiha?

    The Answer:
    Basmala is a verse in the chapter an-Naml in the Quran. IT IS DISPUTABLE WHETHER THE BASMALA MENTIONED at the beginning of each chapter in the Quran IS A VERSE OR NOT

    …..Thus, Imam Malik concluded THAT BASMALA WAS NOT A VERSE EXCEPT IN VERSE 30 OF THE CHAPTER AN-NAML, based on the evidence mentioned above ]

    EITHER THEY ARE LYING OR YOU’RE LYING , but i think all of your kind are just BUNCH OF LIARS , remember Imam HAFS? 😀

    …And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    Because Sunni muslims tolerate Maliki Sunni for REJECTING VERSE BASMALAH on Surah Fatiha and even rejecting it as first verse on every Chapter of Quran

    And this means THE ABROGATION OF THE RULING ON S29:47

  22. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: BASMALA WAS NOT A VERSE EXCEPT IN VERSE 30 OF THE CHAPTER AN-NAML”

    There’s no Maliki who doesn’t accept Uthman Mushaf. All Malikis just hinted a fact that their dialect is not even equal to a verse.

  23. Uthman rahimullah says:

    θ says:There’s no Maliki who doesn’t accept Uthman Mushaf. All Malikis just hinted a fact that their dialect is not even equal to a verse.

    You may keep on repeating your own baseless gibberish opinion over and over again hoping the BITTER TRUTH to go away

    [ Imam Malik concluded THAT BASMALA WAS NOT A VERSE EXCEPT IN VERSE 30 OF THE CHAPTER AN-NAML , taken from OFFICIAL ISLAMIC WEBSITE http://www.questionsonislam.com/question/basmala-bismillahirrahmanirrahim-name-allah-most-gracious-most-merciful-verse-quran ]

    …And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    Because Sunni muslims tolerate Maliki Sunni for REJECTING VERSE BASMALAH on Surah Fatiha and even rejecting it as first verse on every Chapter of Quran

    And this means THE ABROGATION OF THE RULING ON S29:47

  24. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: Imam Malik concluded”

    Malikis may keep their repeating conclusion trillion times but it is nothing as long as they accept Uthmani Mushaf. I have explained that paradoxical circle with a simple fact how a dialect can’t be a verse in Mushaf.

  25. Uthman rahimullah says:

    ++they accept Uthmani Mushaf++

    Quran told you it’s not about mushaf but VERSE

    …And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    [ Imam Malik concluded THAT BASMALA WAS NOT A VERSE EXCEPT IN VERSE 30 OF THE CHAPTER AN-NAML , taken from OFFICIAL ISLAMIC WEBSITE http://www.questionsonislam.com/question/basmala-bismillahirrahmanirrahim-name-allah-most-gracious-most-merciful-verse-quran ]

    Either you REPENT and OBEY your Quran to apply S29:47 on the Maliki or YOU’RE ACTUALLY AGREEING TO ABROGATE THE RULING OF QURAN S29:47

  26. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: Quran told you it’s not about mushaf but VERSE“

    “Verse” is just a term for Mushaf. That’s why all Malikis are afraid so much of rejecting Uthmani.

  27. Uthman rahimullah says:

    +++Verse” is just a term for Mushaf. That’s why all Malikis are afraid so much of rejecting Uthmani++

    PLEASE GIVE SOME PROOF FOR ANY SCHOLARS SAYING VERSE IS A TERM FOR MUSHAF LIKE YOU’VE CLAIMED

    You may keep on repeating this gibberish opinion of yours hoping the truth to go away.

    Quran told you it’s not about mushaf but VERSE

    …And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    [ Imam Malik concluded THAT BASMALA WAS NOT A VERSE EXCEPT IN VERSE 30 OF THE CHAPTER AN-NAML , taken from OFFICIAL ISLAMIC WEBSITE http://www.questionsonislam.com/question/basmala-bismillahirrahmanirrahim-name-allah-most-gracious-most-merciful-verse-quran ]

    Either you REPENT and OBEY your Quran to apply S29:47 on the Maliki or YOU’RE ACTUALLY AGREEING TO ABROGATE THE RULING OF QURAN S29:47

  28. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: SCHOLARS SAYING VERSE IS A TERM FOR MUSHAF”

    It is just a common sense in all literature in this world. Number of each verse can be only known – “inserted” actually – in Mushaf, not in any dialect. Understood? It is just a common sense.

  29. Uthman rahimullah says:

    PLEASE GIVE SOME PROOF FOR ANY SCHOLARS SAYING VERSE IS A TERM FOR MUSHAF LIKE YOU’VE CLAIMED

    Since apparently you’re trolling around with your baseless without any referral opinion then the FACT STILL STANDS

    [ Imam Malik concluded THAT BASMALA WAS NOT A VERSE EXCEPT IN VERSE 30 OF THE CHAPTER AN-NAML , taken from OFFICIAL ISLAMIC WEBSITE http://www.questionsonislam.com/question/basmala-bismillahirrahmanirrahim-name-allah-most-gracious-most-merciful-verse-quran ]

    …And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    Imam Maliki BLATANTLY REJECT BASMALAH AS A VERSE, understood ?
    But no Sunni apply S29:47 on him, which means YOU’RE ACTUALLY AGREEING TO ABROGATE THE RULING OF QURAN S29:47

  30. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: But no Sunni apply S29:47 on him”

    Nobody equates a dialect without number to the real verse that needs a number attached in Mushaf.

  31. Uthman rahimullah says:

    θ says:Nobody equates a dialect

    No PERSON STUPID ENOUGH EQUATES THE REJECTION OF ONE WHOLE ENTIRE VERSE WITH DIALECT DIFFERENCES

    Imam Malik concluded THAT BASMALA WAS NOT A VERSE EXCEPT IN VERSE 30 OF THE CHAPTER AN-NAML , taken from OFFICIAL ISLAMIC WEBSITE http://www.questionsonislam.com/question/basmala-bismillahirrahmanirrahim-name-allah-most-gracious-most-merciful-verse-quran

    …And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    No Sunni apply S29:47 on Maliki, because THEY’RE ACTUALLY AGREEING TO ABROGATE THE RULING OF QURAN S29:47

  32. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: No PERSON STUPID ENOUGH ”

    One whole entire verse? Not at all, Read verse 30 chapter 27 please. Basmalah does not stand alone there, rather it is added up by many words:
    Q. 27, v.30 It is from Solomon, and it is by name of Allah the Most Merciful, the Most Loving.

    Nobody knows a number of a verse in a chapter unless the number is inserted and attached on each verse written in Mushaf.
    Malikis can only know and count the number “30” of the chapter of Naml because Malikis accept Uthmani Mushaf.

  33. Uthman rahimullah says:

    ++One whole entire verse? ++
    You know very well, you’re trying as hard as possible to make an idiot of yourself to deny this biiter truth

    Imam Malik concluded THAT BASMALA WAS NOT A VERSE EXCEPT IN VERSE 30 OF THE CHAPTER AN-NAML , taken from OFFICIAL ISLAMIC WEBSITE

    It is DISPUTABLE whether the basmala mentioned at the beginning of each chapter in the Quran IS A VERSE OR NOT

    http://www.questionsonislam.com/question/basmala-bismillahirrahmanirrahim-name-allah-most-gracious-most-merciful-verse-quran

    …And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    No Sunni apply S29:47 on Maliki, because THEY’RE ACTUALLY AGREEING TO ABROGATE THE RULING OF QURAN S29:47

  34. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: Imam Malik concluded THAT BASMALA WAS NOT A VERSE EXCEPT IN VERSE 30 OF THE CHAPTER AN-NAML”

    Is the name Solomon also a part of “one verse of Basmalah” in Q.27, v.30? Not at all.

  35. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: It is DISPUTABLE whether the basmala mentioned at the beginning of each chapter in the Quran IS A VERSE”

    It is indisputable how all Malikis are afraid so much of rejecting Uthmani Mushaf in which Basmala is placed at the beginning of Fatiha, i.e. Q.1, v.1.

  36. Uthman rahimullah says:

    I know you still have a brain enough to acknowkedged the statement meant to tell that Basmala is within the verse 30 of Surah An-Naml, and that’s the only Basmalah that will be acknowledged by Imam Maliki as part of Surah nor Verse.

    { Imam Malik concluded THAT BASMALA WAS NOT A VERSE EXCEPT IN VERSE 30 OF THE CHAPTER AN-NAML ,

    It is DISPUTABLE whether the basmala mentioned at the beginning of each chapter in the Quran IS A VERSE OR NOT

    taken from OFFICIAL ISLAMIC WEBSITE http://www.questionsonislam.com/question/basmala-bismillahirrahmanirrahim-name-allah-most-gracious-most-merciful-verse-quran }

    …And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    No Sunni apply S29:47 on Maliki, because THEY’RE ACTUALLY AGREEING TO ABROGATE THE RULING OF QURAN S29:47

  37. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: concluded THAT BASMALA”

    Only a loser relies on a self-contradictory argument.
    As long as all Malikis are afraid so much of rejecting Uthmani Mushaf in which Basmala is placed at the beginning of Fatiha, i.e. Q.1, v.1, Malikis are self-contradictory.

  38. Uthman rahimullah says:

    ++As long as all Malikis are afraid so much of rejecting Uthmani Mushaf++

    Nope ,you know very well in your heart whose the real LOOSER 😀

    You’re just trolling around spouting your baseless argument hoping this BITTER TRUTH to somehow go away

    { Imam Malik concluded THAT BASMALA WAS NOT A VERSE EXCEPT IN VERSE 30 OF THE CHAPTER AN-NAML ,

    It is DISPUTABLE whether the basmala mentioned at the beginning of each chapter in the Quran IS A VERSE OR NOT

    taken from OFFICIAL ISLAMIC WEBSITE http://www.questionsonislam.com/question/basmala-bismillahirrahmanirrahim-name-allah-most-gracious-most-merciful-verse-quran }

    …And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    No Sunni apply S29:47 on Maliki, because THEY’RE ACTUALLY AGREEING TO ABROGATE THE RULING OF QURAN S29:47

    The TRUTH HURTS ain’t it ?

  39. θ says:

    As long as all Malikis follow a Warsh’s dialect of Prophet Muhammad and Uthman himself, also Abu Bakr, and Umar in daily prayer (by not uttering Basmala at all, or just reciting it softly), Malikis are consistent with their approved dialect.

  40. θ says:

    Proof that the dialect in daily prayer is not equal with Qur’an and Mushaf: there’s another wording “Amen” after Q.1, v.7.

  41. Uthman rahimullah says:

    ++Malikis are consistent with their approved dialect.++

    Only A RETARD CLAIMS A REJECTION FOR ONE WHOLE ENTIRE VERSE AS DIALECT DIFFERENCES

    You’re just trolling around spouting your baseless argument hoping this BITTER TRUTH to somehow go away

    { Imam Malik concluded THAT BASMALA WAS NOT A VERSE EXCEPT IN VERSE 30 OF THE CHAPTER AN-NAML ,

    It is DISPUTABLE whether the basmala mentioned at the beginning of each chapter in the Quran IS A VERSE OR NOT

    taken from OFFICIAL ISLAMIC WEBSITE http://www.questionsonislam.com/question/basmala-bismillahirrahmanirrahim-name-allah-most-gracious-most-merciful-verse-quran }

    …And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    No Sunni apply S29:47 on Maliki, because THEY’RE ACTUALLY AGREEING TO ABROGATE THE RULING OF QURAN S29:47

  42. θ says:

    Uthman and Malikis are consistent: they both approve Uthmani Mushaf on Basmala at Q.1, v.1, and both recite in daily prayer a dialect of Warsh (by not uttering Basmala at all, or just reciting it softly).

  43. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: No Sunni apply S29:47 on Maliki”

    Exactly, No Sunni would apply Q.29, v.47 on both Malikis and Uthman because they both approve Uthmani Mushaf on Basmala at Q.1, v.1, and both recite in daily prayer a dialect of Warsh (by not uttering Basmala at all, or just reciting it softly).

  44. Uthman rahimullah says:

    {Uthman and Malikis are consistent: they both approve Uthmani Mushaf on Basmala at Q.1, v.1}
    LOL yeaa keep dreaming


    at 07:04 Imam Yasir Qadhi CLEARLY&LITERALLY ADMITTED The Mushaf(he himself using this terminology) in THE MALIKIS in North Africa DOESN’T HAVE BASMALAH as THE FIRST VERSE in Al-Fatiha but instead ALLHMDOLEELAH(which is supposed to be the second verse in Uthman version)

    { Imam Malik concluded THAT BASMALA WAS NOT A VERSE EXCEPT IN VERSE 30 OF THE CHAPTER AN-NAML ,

    It is DISPUTABLE whether the basmala mentioned at the beginning of each chapter in the Quran IS A VERSE OR NOT

    taken from OFFICIAL ISLAMIC WEBSITE http://www.questionsonislam.com/question/basmala-bismillahirrahmanirrahim-name-allah-most-gracious-most-merciful-verse-quran }

    …And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    No Sunni apply S29:47 on Maliki, because THEY’RE ACTUALLY AGREEING TO ABROGATE THE RULING OF QURAN S29:47

    I think you’re pretty well sure who’s the looser 😀

  45. θ says:

    Proof that the dialect in daily prayer is not equal with Qur’an and Mushaf: there’s another wording “Amen” after Q.1, v.7.
    No Sunni would apply Q.29, v.47 on both Malikis and Uthman because they both approve Uthmani Mushaf on Basmala at Q.1, v.1, and both recite in daily prayer a dialect of Warsh (by not uttering Basmala at all, or just reciting it softly).

  46. Uthman rahimullah says:

    You’re barking on a wrong tree

    ALL YOUR OWN SCHOLARS TESTIFYING AGAINST YOU

    IMAM YASIR QADHI TESTIFIES FOR MALIKI BASMALAH IS ONLY A PHRASE AND NOT A VERSE OF AT FATIHA and CLEARLY&LITERALLY ADMITTED The Mushaf(he himself using this terminology) in THE MALIKIS in North Africa DOESN’T HAVE BASMALAH as THE FIRST VERSE in Al-Fatiha but instead ALLHMDOLEELAH(which is supposed to be the second verse in Uthman version)

    Another statement from official islamic website
    { Imam Malik concluded THAT BASMALA WAS NOT A VERSE EXCEPT IN VERSE 30 OF THE CHAPTER AN-NAML ,

    It is DISPUTABLE whether the basmala mentioned at the beginning of each chapter in the Quran IS A VERSE OR NOT

    taken from OFFICIAL ISLAMIC WEBSITE http://www.questionsonislam.com/question/basmala-bismillahirrahmanirrahim-name-allah-most-gracious-most-merciful-verse-quran }

    …And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    No Sunni apply S29:47 on Maliki, because THEY’RE ACTUALLY AGREEING TO ABROGATE THE RULING OF QURAN S29:47

  47. Uthman rahimullah says:

    Plus according to Maliki scholars THEY REJECT the Basmalah as A FIRST VERSE for ANY Chapter in Quran whether it’s written or not

    The Maliki Sunni clarly REJECTS BASMALAH AS A FIRST VERSE in EVERY CHAPTER OF QURAN

    That’s why they should’ve been applied with …And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)

    BUT No Sunni wants to apply S29:47 on the Malikis, because

    THE SUNNIS ARE ACTUALLY AGREEING TO ABROGATE THE RULING OF QURAN S29:47

    That’s a prove that the ruling of Quran can be Abolished by Muslims Consensus

  48. θ says:

    Prophet Muhammad and early Caliphs preferred the Maliki’s way in prayers.
    I prayed with the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace), Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and ‘Uthman, and they opened with “al-Hamdu li Llahi Rabbi l-‘Alamin,”not mentioning “Bismi Llahi r-Rahmani r-Rahim” at the first of the recital or the last of it [and in another version, “I didn’t hear any of them recite ‘Bismi Llahi r-Rahmani r-Rahim’”] (Muslim, 1.299).

  49. Uthman rahimullah says:

    taken from http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=260482

    [The First Opinion: The Basmalah is NEITHER A VERSE of Soorah Al-Faatihah nor is it a verse of any other Soorah; this is the view of Imaam Maalik……].

  50. Uthman rahimullah says:

    EXCEPT IN MIDDLE OF SURAH AN-NAML

  51. θ says:

    “Uthman rahimullah says: EXCEPT IN MIDDLE OF SURAH AN-NAML”

    Solomon is not one of Names of Allah.
    Q.27, v.30. It is from Solomon, and it is by name of Allah the Most Merciful, the Most Loving.

  52. Uthman rahimullah says:

    The well-known opinion of the Maaliki School is that the Basmalah IS NOT A VERSE OF THE QURAN except in Soorah An-Naml, where it is part of a verse,

    http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=260482
    ===================================

    TO SAY BASMALAH IS NOT A VERSE OF QURAN EXCEPT IN NAML is A STRONG STATEMENT

    This means They Reject 114 VERSES of Quran !

    …And none REJECT Our VERSES except the disbelievers (S29:47)
    BUT No Sunni wants to apply S29:47 on the Malikis, because

    THE SUNNIS ARE ACTUALLY AGREEING TO ABROGATE THE RULING OF QURAN S29:47

    That’s an UNDENIABLE proof that the ruling of Quran can be ABOLISHED by HUMAN Consensus

Comments are closed.