Answering Questions Through The Holy Qur'an: Does the Qur'an have Syro-Aramaic origins?

Does the Qur'an have Syro-Aramaic origins?

20:113 And thus We have sent it down, the Qur’an in Arabic and have explained the warnings in it that they may fear or that it may cause them remembrance.

(The false concept of the Qur'an having Syro-Aramaic origins was invented by the German deceiver “Christoph Luxenberg” in his infamous book, “The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran: A Contribution to the Decoding of the Language of the Koran. According to the Wikipedia article “Christoph Luxenberg,” “Luxenberg himself claims to have chosen a pseudonym to protect himself against possible violent repercussions.” If what he says in his book is true and so evident, why would he expect violent repercussions? This indicates that he knows he is lying about the Qur’an and Islam. According to the Wikipedia article “the Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran,” “the book received considerable attention from the popular press in North America and Europe at its release.” Obviously, those who oppose Islam-such as Christians, Jews, and atheists-are interested in reading such material whether it is true or false, though it is always false.) (Allah knows best)

3:7 He is the One Who revealed to you the Book, in it are Verses which are absolutely clear - they (are) the foundation of the Book, and others are allegorical. Then as for those in whose hearts is perversity - [so] they follow what is allegorical of it, seeking discord and seeking its interpretation. And none except Allah knows its interpretation. And those who are firm in knowledge, they say, "We believe in it. All is from our Lord." And not will take heed except men of understanding.

(Christoph Luxenberg opposes the Qur’an by claiming that the text of the Qur’an was substantially derived from Syriac Christian liturgy, arguing that many “obscure” portions become clear when they are back-translated and interpreted as Syriacisms. However, the Qur’an says, “He is the One Who revealed to you the Book, in it are Verses which are absolutely clear - they (are) the foundation of the Book, and others are allegorical. Then as for those in whose hearts is perversity - [so] they follow what is allegorical of it, seeking discord and seeking its interpretation” (3:7).) (See the link below: “Clarity of the Qur’an? Is the Qur'an vague and unclear?”) (Allah knows best)

5:42 Listeners of falsehood, devourers of the forbidden. So if they come to you, then judge between them or turn away from them. And if you turn away from them, then they will never harm you in anything. And if you judge, then judge between them with justice. Indeed, Allah loves those who are just.

(Christoph Luxenberg argues that “the name Mecca (Macca) itself, which one has not been able to explain etymologically on the basis of Arabic,” and he suggests a Syro-Aramaic origin for “Mecca” meaning “(the) lower (one),” implying a status of inferiority, insignificance, or that it was not a major city. It is obvious that Christoph Luxenberg was searching for pejorative meanings within the Syro-Aramaic language or against Islam to link them with the Qur’an, but this appears to be a forced linguistic insertion. In Arabic, the name Mecca stems from the root m-k-k (Miim-Kaf-Kaf), which carries meanings such as “sucking, sucking up, absorbing, drinking up, destruction / destroying, diminishing, diminution / failing; failure, to cast, to throw away, to discard to straighten/tighten or impede/restrict, to beseech / ask / accept, crowding, competition”-all of which align with the city’s historical and geographical context. These interpretations include a place that rapidly absorbs or sucks out every drop of water, “sucks out” evil things or evil people because believers must behave there (2:197), is a safe place (3:97) in the sense of being free from disbelief or not being controlled by disbelievers, or a place that “crowds” or absorbs people from all over the world for the obligatory pilgrimage (3:97). It is also the place where disbelievers or wrongdoers are diminished or destroyed (2:191) in the context of their attacking or oppressing Muslims, so Muslims defend themselves there, but also anywhere) (“Makkah / Mecca” refers to the city of Makkah itself, while “Bakkah” (3:96) refers specifically to the Kaaba and its surroundings located in Mecca. The reference to “Bakka” in the Qur’an and the biblical “valley of Baca” (Psalms 84:5-6, also regarding pilgrimage) provide a much stronger historical framework for the name than Luxenberg’s false theories.) (Non-Muslims who read such books are listeners of falsehood. Most people do not think for themselves and would not check if the false statements of Christoph Luxenberg are true or not.) (Allah knows best)

4:82 Then do they not ponder on the Qur’an? If it had been from other than Allah, surely they would have found much contradiction in it.

(In his proposed methodology, Christoph Luxenberg wants you to first check Tafsir al-Tabari. Notice that non-Muslim sources speak well of Al-Tabari, as if he were the best scholar ever. For example, you cannot find a single negative word about him in the Wikipedia articles “Al-Tabari” or “Tafsir al-Tabari” (at the time I checked). However, there are many false stories in Al-Tabari and the Tafsir of Al-Tabari. Whenever a critic or Islamophobe quotes a story from Ibn Ishaq or Al-Tabari, it is most likely false; the stories are not even confirmed in the Qur’an or the major hadith collections, so they are to be rejected. Some Muslim historians and biographers collected false stories and included them in their books, while it is well known that many people lied during the time of the Prophet Muhammad and opposed him. People continued to lie or make up stories after time as well. For example, the “satanic verses” story is obviously false and is only found in Al-Tabari.) (As an example, in Christianity, when we compare the Gospels, we can see how the stories about Jesus were changed as well. Christians focus on the latest Gospel, the Gospel of John, as proof of Jesus’s divinity, yet they cannot prove it with the Gospel of Mark, which is an earlier source.) (Al-Tabari was not even Arab, but Persian, and was born much later than the Prophet Muhammad; therefore, obviously his fabricated work is irrelevant to knowing the truth.) (Allah knows best)

4:46 Among the Jews are those who distort words from their places and they say, "We hear and disobey" and "Hear but be not heard” and "Raina", twisting their tongues and defaming the religion. And if they had said, "We hear and obey" and "Hear and look at us”, it would surely have been better for them and more suitable. [And] but Allah cursed them for their disbelief, so they believe not, except for a few.

(According to the Wikipedia article “The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran,” the word hurin, which is translated as “fair ones” regarding women in Paradise, is translated by Christoph Luxenberg as “grapes.” The root of the word hurin is Ha-Waw-Ra and occurs 13 times in the Qur’an; none of these occurrences support the meaning of “grapes.” Actually, the root for “grapes” in the Qur’an is Ayn-Nun-Ba. Luxenberg tries to make people believe that early readers misinterpreted terms for paradise as descriptions of women, even though, for example, the context of Verse 52:20 is “We will marry them to fair women with large eyes.” The word hurin appears alongside the mention of marriage and the description of their eyes in the very same sentence. Other Verses also support the presence of women in Paradise (3:15, etc.). Luxenberg’s statement is ridiculous and makes no sense.)(Allah knows best)

3:15 Say, "Shall I inform you of (something) better than that. For those who fear[ed], with their Lord, (are)/(will be) Gardens from underneath them/(beneath which) [the] rivers flow[s], abiding forever in it, and pure spouses and approval from Allah. And Allah (is) All-Seer of (His) slaves."

(In order to claim that Muhammad is not the last of the Prophets, Christoph Luxenberg says that khatam means “witness” (i.e., a witness to those Prophets who came before him) instead of “seal of the Prophets.” However, the root of khatam occurs eight times in the Qur’an, and none of them support the meaning “witness”; they mean “seal” (kha ta mim). The root word in the Qur’an for “witness” is shin-ha-dal. If such a person applied the meaning “witness” to other occurrences of the root kh-T-M, the verses would become nonsensical. It is obvious that the root meaning of the word is essentially “seal.”) (Thus, Christoph Luxenberg’s statements are ridiculous; he is exposing himself rather than exposing Islam.) (Another point is that the Jews, who also speak a Semitic language, distorted words during the time of Muhammad (4:46) to defame Islam, so this is not even a new strategy against Islam.) (Allah knows best)

16:103 And We certainly know that they say, "It is only a human being who teaches him." The tongue of the one they refer to is foreign while this is in a clear Arabic language. 16:104 Indeed, those who do not believe in the Verses of Allah, Allah will not guide them, and for them is a painful punishment. 16:105 They only invent falsehood who do not believe in the Verses of Allah, and they are the liars.

(According to Verses 16:103-105, similar claims were made during the time of the Prophet about the origin of the Qur’an: “the tongue of the one they refer to is foreign.” but Verse 16:105 is explicit, stating, “They only invent falsehood who do not believe in the Verses of Allah, and they are the liars”) (“Arabic” is the original language of the Qur’an, and that language is mentioned by name within the Qur’an itself.)(Allah knows best)

43:2 By the clear Book, 43:3 Indeed, We have made it an Arabic Qur’an so that you may understand.

13:37 And thus We have revealed it (to be) a judgment of authority (in) Arabic. And if you (were to) follow their desires after what came/(has come) to you of the knowledge, not for you/(you would not have) against Allah any protector and not/(or any) defender.

41:3 A Book whose Verses are detailed, a Qur’an in Arabic, for a people who know,

12:2 Indeed, We have sent it down as a Qur’an in Arabic so that you may understand.

19:97 So We have only made it easy (yassarnahu) in your tongue that you may give glad tidings with it to the righteous and warn hostile people therewith.

(It is only easy (yassar) in Arabic (19:97). The root of yassar (easy) is Ya-Siin-Ra, meaning “to become gentle, tractable, manageable, easy, to make easy, smooth, etc.” Therefore, the Qur’an is meant to be treated / managed / used in Arabic, not in a foreign language.) (Allah knows best)

39:28 A Qur’an in Arabic, without any crookedness, so that they may become righteous

(Verse 39:28 suggests that other languages might corrupt it. In that case, that book in another language would not be the Qur’an.) (Allah knows best)

15:9 Indeed, We have sent down the Reminder, and indeed, We are surely its Guardians.

(The Qur’an has been preserved in its original Arabic language.)(Allah knows best)

41:44 And if We had made a Qur’an in a foreign (language), they would have said, "Why are its Verses not explained in detail? Is it a foreign (language) and an Arab?" Say, "It is for those who believe, a guidance and a healing." And those who do not believe, there is deafness in their ears, and it is for them blindness. Those are being called from a far place."

(Those who complain because the language of the Qur’an was Arabic-according to this Verse, if the Qur’an had been revealed in any other language, they would not have believed anyway. They simply use it as an excuse. The answer to them is: “It is for those who believe, a guidance and a healing,” regardless of one’s native language.) (Allah knows best)

26:198 And if We had revealed it to anyone of the foreigners. 26:199 And he had recited it to them, they would not have believed in it. 26:200 Thus We have inserted it into the hearts of the criminals.

(Similarly, those who complain because the Messenger was Arab-according to this Verse, if the Messenger had been non-Arab and recited it to the criminals, they would not have believed anyway. They use it as an excuse.) (Allah knows best)

2:120 And the Jews and the Christians will never be pleased with you until you follow their religion. Say, "Indeed, the Guidance of Allah is the Guidance." And if you follow their desires after what has come to you of the knowledge, you will have neither any protector from Allah nor any helper.

(Some Christians claim the Qur’an has Syro-Aramaic origins, while it is actually the Gospel that has Aramaic origins-the language of Jesus. However, the oldest existing Gospel is in Greek, so the Bible is not a reliable source because its original language was not preserved. See the link below: “Is the Bible corrupted?”) (Actually, Verse 5:48 suggests that the (Arabic) Qur’an is the criterion to be used over the Gospel.) (Allah knows best)

14:4 And We did not sent any Messenger except in the language of his people so that he might make clear for them. Then Allah lets go astray whom He wills and guides whom He wills. And He is the All-Mighty, the All-Wise.

(Muhammad was sent in the language of the Arabs.) (Allah knows best)

20:105 And they ask you about the mountains, so say, "My Lord will blast them into particles.

(Some disbelievers view the presence of foreign words in the Qur’an as a flaw, but the presence of foreign words does not make Arabic (and those foreign words) anything other than Arabic.) (All languages in the world have “foreign” words, and you can call all words mentioned in the Qur’an “Arabic words” just as you call all words in an English dictionary “English.” Therefore, non-Muslims’ objections are ridiculous and irrelevant; they are exposing themselves rather than exposing Islam or the Qur’an. See the link below: “Is the Qur’an in pure Arabic language? Then why the presence of foreign words?”) (Allah knows best)

23:20 And a tree (that) springs forth from Mount Sinai (which) produces oil and a relish for those who eat.

(Note: The Syriac language is a dialect of Aramaic.) (According to the article “The Difference Between Aramaic and Arabic” by UTS, “The biggest difference: the two languages are similar in their alphabet and grammar, but they have different roots.” “Aramaic and Arabic are very different languages with vastly different sources and uses.”) (Having different roots is a very important point. While both are Semitic languages and may be mutually intelligible to some degree, their different roots make them very distinct languages.) (Allah knows best)

95:2 And (the) Mount (waturi) Sinai,

(For example, some people say that the word Tur (Mount) in the Qur’an is a Syriac word rather than an Arabic one in origin. They raise this point as if there were something wrong with it, as if the Qur’an should have used jabal, the common Arabic word for “mountain.” These Non-Muslim objections are ridiculous and senseless because both are Arabic words-that is, words used by Arabs which form the Arabic language. The root of jabal is Jiim-Ba-Lam, referring to ANY large, long mountain on Earth, while Tur in the Qur’an refers to a specific place (e.g., Turi Sinina is the Arabic name for Mount Sinai). Tur is interpreted and translated as “Mount” and jabal as “mountain” because Tur (Arabic) and “Mount” (English) are both restricted to specific place names (e.g., “Mount Everest”), while jabal (Arabic) and “mountain” (English) refer to “any” mountain on earth. Some non-Muslims incorrectly suggest that jabal should replace Tur, but they are used in different contexts in the Qur’an: Tur (Mount) is a specific mountain, while jabal (mountain) is any mountain.) (The Arabic root of Tur is Tay-Waw-Ra, which means “stages” in Verse 71:14. This root has many other meanings: approach, repeated times, quantity / measure / extent / limit, aspect / form / disposition, Way of action, manner, kind / class, stage / state, Mount (Sinai), Mount (of Olives), applied to several other mountains, mountain which produces trees, mountain, stranger, utmost point, encounter two extremes, etc.) (The root of jabal is Jiim-Ba-Lam, meaning much / numerous. Any of the mountains of the earth that is big and long; crowd / multitude, etc.) (Allah knows best)

30:22 And among His Signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the diversity of your languages and your colors. Indeed, in that are surely Signs for those of knowledge.

(The point is that the “Arabic language” consists of the words used by Arabs. Those words have specific meanings according to the Arabs themselves. This is what makes each word part of the Arabic language. All languages are distinct based on this fact, regardless of their specific foreign-word content.) (Notice that Verse 30:22 says, “the diversity of your languages and your colors”. This is an excellent comparison-between “languages” and “colors”-because primary colors can be mixed in varying amounts to produce a whole gamut of new colors.) (Allah knows best)

10:94 So if you are in doubt of what We have revealed to you, then ask those who (have been) reading (yaqrauna) the Book before you. Verily, the truth has come to you from your Lord, so do not be among the doubters.

(Luxenberg argues that “Qur’an” (Reading / Recitation) comes from the Syriac Qeryana (Lectionary). His intention is to make people think that the Qur’an was originally a Christian liturgical manual rather than a new revelation. However, for example, Verse 10:94 says “reading the Book.” Replacing the verb “read” with the (given) name “liturgical manual” simply does not make sense and is not the core meaning of the word.) (Allah knows best)

108:1 Indeed, We have given you Al-Kauthar.

(Luxenberg’s claim is that Al-Kauthar is from the Syriac word for “constancy” or “perseverance”. His intention is to replace the “bounty” with an exhortation to “persevere in prayer.” However, the root of Al-Kauthar is kaf-tha-ra, which occurs 167 times in the Qu’ran meaning “more, most, many, abundant, increase,… .” For example, Verse 2:245 says “many times,” and Verse 9:25 says “many regions”,… . How can you replace that? Luxenberg’s theory is invalid.) (Allah knows best)

56:17 There will circulate among them immortal boys (wil’danun),

(Luxenberg falsely attempts to convince readers that the boys mentioned in Verse 56:17 are “grapes,” another attempt to remove the mention of humans from Paradise and replace them with descriptions of fruit (and drinks). However, the root of “boys” is waw lam dal and occurs 102 times in the Qur’an, referring to parents, begetting, being born, son, children, child, boys, mother, father,… . For example, Verse 2:233 uses eight words with the root waw lam dal, and they cannot be replaced with “grapes” at all: “And the mothers (wal-walidatu) shall suckle their children (awladahunna) ….”) (Allah knows best)

2:1 Alif Lam Meem

(Luxenberg suggests that scribes "accidentally" copied the Muqatta'at letters and then forgot what they meant. The Qur’an is a miracle in itself, with mathematical proofs showing that its content (including the Muqatta’at letters) is a revelation from God-correct and intentional rather than accidental. For example, Chapter “An-Naml” (The Ant) is numbered 27 and has 93 Verses. It begins with two letters, “Tay Seen” (Muqatta’at letters). In Chapter 27, the letter “Tay” is written exactly 27 times. In the same Chapter, consisting of 93 Verses, the letter “Seen” is written exactly 93 times. The Muqatta’at here proves the preservation of the Qur’an and that the letters are not accidental.) (Luxenberg’s theory relies on the idea that the Qur’an was merely a written document that later scribes misread, which ignores the Oral Tradition. From day one, the Quran was memorized and recited aloud by thousands of companions. Luxenberg claims these letters are Syriac abbreviations, yet he cannot provide a consistent rule for how to read them. For his theory to work, he simply picks different Syriac phrases for different letters without following any internal logic. In other words, he cannot explain why he chooses those specific meanings in a way that makes sense to other experts; he only chooses what he likes rather than following a strict system.) (For example, if Alif-Lam-Mim were simply abbreviations for Syriac hymns, the Prophet Muhammad and his followers would have recited the full hymns, not the individual letters. If Alif-Lam-Mim-which appears in six different Chapters-meant one thing in one Chapter, why would it not mean the same in another? The Quran uses 15 different combinations in 29 different Chapters. Luxenberg's attempts to map these to Christian liturgy require extreme linguistic gymnastics that do not follow the standard rules of Syriac grammar or Arabic morphology.) (Luxenberg assumes that 7th-century Mecca and Medina were Syriac-speaking colonies. While there was trade and contact, the Quran is obviously rooted in the Arabic dialect. To claim the "core" of the Quran is a misunderstood Christian hymnbook is not just a linguistic claim; it is a false historical agenda that ignores the distinct cultural and linguistic environment of the Arabian Peninsula.) (Luxenberg’s theory is a disingenuous attempt to 'Christianize' the Quran by ignoring the living oral tradition that has preserved the pronunciation of these letters for 1,400 years. His claim that these are “accidental abbreviations” is invalid and does not hold up because it requires us to believe that an entire civilization 'forgot' its own liturgy overnight. By stripping the letters of their original intention or purpose, he is not revealing a hidden truth; he is belittling the linguistic miracle of the text to fit a hidden agenda. Search my blog for the article about the Muqatta'at letters, "Letter counts in the Qur’an.") (Note: even if it were not possible to know what Muqatta’at letters are about, there are other miracles or matters regarding Chapters, letters, and words everywhere in the Qur’an that are 100% accurate, correct, and miraculous, whereas other books are not) (Allah knows best)