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 “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 article “Christoph Luxenberg” in wikipedia, “Luxenberg himself claims to have chosen a pseudonym to protect himself against possible violent repercussions”. If that which he says in his book is true and so evident, why would he expect violent repercussions? It indicates that he knows that he is lying about the Qur’an and Islam. And according to the article “the Syro-Aramaic reading of the Koran”, in wikipedia, “the book received considerable attention from the popular press in North America and Europe at its release”. Obviously, those who oppose Islam (e.g. Christians, Jews, atheists) are interested in reading stuff like that, whether it is true or false, while 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 is opposing the Qur’an by saying 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”. While 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 says that “the name Mecca (Macca) itself, which one has not been able to explain etymologically on the basis of Arabic”, and he says that “mecca” means “(the) lower (one)”; It is obvious that Christoph Luxenberg was searching for pejorative meanings within the Syro-Aramaic language, or against Islam, and relate it with the Qur’an. While the root of Mecca in Arabic is “Miim-Kaf-Kaf” and it means “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”. And, in regard to the place, “Makkah / Mecca” is just “the city of Makkah”, which is related to “Bakka”, and its name is actually predicted in Psalms 84:5-6, in regard to pilgrimage)(Non-Muslims who read such a books are listeners of falsehood. Most of people are not going to 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.

(Christoph Luxenberg, in his proposed methodology, he wants you to firstly check “Tafsir al-Tabari”!!!. Notice that non-Muslim sources tell very good things about Al-Tabari, as if he were the best scholar ever. For example, you cannot find any bad word about him in the articles “Al-Tabari” and “Tafsir al-Tabari” in wikipedia. While there are many false stories in Al-Tabari and the Tafsir of Al-Tabari. So, whenever a critic or Islamophobe quotes a story from Ibn Ishaq or Al-Tabari, it’s most likely false, and the stories are not even confirmed in the Qur’an or the major hadith collections, then it is to be rejected. Some Muslim historians and biographers collected false stories and put them in their books, while it is known that many people lied during the time of the Prophet Muhammad, and opposed him. And people were going to lie or make up stories after the time of the Prophet Muhammad as well. For example, the satanic verses story is obviously false and 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 too. Christians focus in the latest Gospel, the Gospel of John, as a proof of Jesus’s divinity, while they cannot prove it with the Gospel of Mark, which is an early source)(Al-Tabari was not even Arab, but Persian, and was born in a much later period than Prophet Muhammad, so his work is irrelevant to know 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 article “The Syro-Aramaic reading of the Koran”, in wikipedia, the word “hurin” which is translated as “fair ones” in regard to women in Paradise, Christoph Luxenberg translates it as “grapes”. The root of the word “hurin” is “Ha-Waw-Ra”, and occurs 13 times in the Qur’an, none of them supports that it means “grapes”. Actually, the root of “grapes” in the Qur’an is “Ayn-Nun-Ba”)(And Christoph Luxenberg, in order to prove that Muhammad is not the last of the Prophets, he says that “khatam” means “witness” (aka witness to those Prophets who came before him”), instead of “seal of the Prophets”, while the root of “khatam” occurs 8 times in the Qur’an, and none of them supports that it means “witness”, but it means “seal” (kha ta mim). Actually, the root word in the Qur’an for “witness” is “shin ha dal”)(So, Christoph Luxenberg’s statements are ridiculous and he is exposing himself, rather than exposing Islam)(Another point is that the Jews, who also speak a Semitic language, distorted words at the time of Muhammad (4:46), to defame Islam, so it 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, something similar was said, at 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, it says, “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 even mentioned by name in the Qur’an)(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”, and it means “become gentle / tractable / manageable / easy, make easy / smooth, etc”; so the Qur’an is 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 might suggest that other languages might corrupt it. Then that book, in that other 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 in Arabic, according to this Verse, if the Qur’an had been revealed in any other language, they would have not believed anyhow, so they use it as an excuse. So the answer to them is “it is for those who believe, a guidance and a healing”, regardless of someone’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 was to recite it to them (the criminals), they would have not believed anyhow, so 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 say that the Qur’an has Syro-Aramaic origins, while the Gospel is the One having Aramaic origin (the language of Jesus), but the oldest 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 a 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 something bad, while the presence of foreign words does not make Arabic (and those foreign words) to be other than Arabic)(All languages in the world have “foreign” words, and you can call “Arabic words” to all words mentioned in the Qur’an, just as you call English to all words in an English dictionary. So, non-Muslim’s objections are ridiculous, and irrelevant, and 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: 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 relevant point. So, both languages can be mutually intelligible to some degree, and both are Semitic languages, but they have different roots, which makes them to be very different 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, not an Arabic one in origin. Mentioning this point as if there were something bad in it, and as if the Qur’an should use “jabal”, which is the Arabic word for “mountain”. Non-Muslims’ objections are ridiculous and senseless, because both are Arabic words (aka words used by Arabs which form the Arabic language), and because the root of “jabal” is “Jiim-Ba-Lam”, and it refers to “ANY of the mountains of the earth that is big and long”, while “tur” in the Qur’an refers to a certain place (e.g. “turi sinina” is the “Arabic” name of the “mountain of Sinai”). “Tur” is translated / interpreted as “mount” and “jabal” is translated / interpreted as “mountain”, because “tur” (Arabic) and “mount” (English) are both “restricted” to place names (e.g. “Mount Everest”), while “jabal” (Arabic) and “mountain” (English) are both “any” of the mountains of the earth. So, some non-Muslims wrongly suggest that the word “jabal” should replace “tur”, while they are in fact 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”, and it means “stages” in Verse 71:14. The root “Tay-Waw-Ra” 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” / mountain is “Jiim-Ba-Lam”, and it means “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 “Arabic language” are the words “used” by the Arabs. And those words used by the Arabs have a certain meaning, according to Arabs themselves. And that’s what makes their language (each word) to be Arabic language. All languages in the world are all “different languages” according to this fact, regardless of the fact that all languages in the world contain foreign words)(Notice that Verse 30:22 says, “the diversity of your languages and your colors”. It’s a good comparison between “languages” and “colors”, because there are primary colors that can be mixed in varying amounts to produce a gamut of (new) colors)(Allah knows best)

See also: Is the Qur’an in pure Arabic language? Then why the presence of foreign words?

http://aqtthq.blogspot.com.es/2017/02/is-quran-in-pure-arabic-language-then.html

See also: Why do Muslims pray in Arabic? Why not in their own language? Requirement to learn in Arabic?

http://aqtthq.blogspot.com.es/2016/04/why-do-muslims-pray-in-arabic-why-not.html

See also: Can the Arabic Qur’an be contained in books of other languages?

http://aqtthq.blogspot.com.es/2017/02/can-arabic-quran-be-contained-in-books.html

See also: Some English words of Arabic origin or similar to Arabic

http://aqtthq.blogspot.com.es/2016/08/why-some-muslims-printspread.html

See also: Some similar words in Hebrew or the Hebrew Bible and the Arabic Qur’an

http://aqtthq.blogspot.com.es/2016/09/some-similar-words-in-hebrewthe-hebrew.html

See also: Some Spanish words of Arabic origin or similar to Arabic https://aqtthq.blogspot.com.es/2016/10/some-spanish-words-of-arabic-origin-or.html

See also: Clarity of the Qur’an? Is the Qur'an vague and unclear?