:: Was Muhammed name of a Prophet? ::

[Noon waalqalami]

Are diacritics not added later to make old languages easier to understand?

Peace - earliest text is shorthand perhaps to save space without diacritics need to use context ...

ام or/mother
ومن and from/whom
ذكر the male/reminder
اخوه brothers/brother his

[Man of Faith]

Peace,

Sorry I did not understand at all, brother Noon waalqalami?

God bless you

[Noon waalqalami]

Peace,

Sorry I did not understand at all, brother Noon waalqalami?

God bless you

Peace, strip out markings and many words are written identical as with examples given ...

4:11 ىوصىكم directs you الله the god فى in اولادكم children yours للذكر to the male/remembrance (use context)
54:17 ولقد and indeed ىسرنا made easy we القران the Qur?an للذكر to the male/remembrance (use context)

[Man of Faith]

Peace noon,

Okay. I did not read enough. I did not say that diacritics are not useful, only that if they may or may not have been part of the original compilation.

God bless you

[mmkhan]

Peace,

Are diacritics not added later to make old languages easier to understand?

How are they in that case part of God's revelation and not be affected by human error?

Same with Hebrew or Aramaic. The languages were written with no vowels and it was a disadvantage later of course. Even there they have later added diacritics to make understanding and reading easier.

I think the diacritics lead to a lot of conjecture. I would not rely on them, not to 100% anyway.

God bless you

Peace brother,

I very strongly believe that all diacritics are original sent down with the text.

If anyone says that diacritics are added later, I have some questions:

- Why Allah did not sent down His message with diacritics, any possible reason?
- If diacritics are added later by humans, then why should I not doubt the Book of Allah?
- How can call it the Book of Allah when human interference is involved in it?
- As brother Noon has given examples [there are many more], how do people understand what exactly Allah wanted to say? Hence, it could not be called the Book of guidance which confuses more.

Many more questions may rise. Until we study it and study the patterns and structures set by Allah using diacritics in the Book, it is really hard to understand/believe that all in the Book is from Allah.


May Allah bless you
mmKhan

[Man of Faith]

Peace,

Okay. Thanks for your thoughts, mmkhan.

God bless you

[mmkhan]

Peace,

Okay. Thanks for your thoughts, mmkhan.

God bless you

Peace brother,

You are very welcome

May Allah bless you
mmKhan

[onlyquran01]

From http://www.doverchiv.narod.ru/morozov/6-01-01.htm

So the temple of the Kaaba I will call Meteor stone temple , as the nature of his meteoric now proved Medina as its residents - Yathrib Pharaoh - firgaunom and himself Mohammed, just a prophet , because Muhammad , as I have said many times , is not name, and the posthumous nickname meaning " illustrious ." Actually his name - as they say we do these primary sources - was Abul- Kazem , son of Abdullah , the grandson Mutalib , it is quite difficult for our pronunciation , and simply translated means : Father of the Universe ( Cosmos ), 1 son Bogosluzhitelya Grandson of penalties .

[mohf]

- As brother Noon has given examples [there are many more], how do people understand what exactly Allah wanted to say? Hence, it could not be called the Book of guidance which confuses more.

You did not explain why a book with human interference can not be a book of guidance?

- If diacritics are added later by humans, then why should I not doubt the Book of Allah?

Actually, this is a question you should ask yourself: do you doubt the Book of Allah, and why do you not doubt it, if we assume diacritics are added later by humans?

- Why Allah did not sent down His message with diacritics, any possible reason?

How did Allah sent his message, anyway? Do you believe a physical book fell from heaven to earth, and that you are reading the exact same book?

- How can call it the Book of Allah when human interference is involved in it?

Is the book you are reading not already, without doubt, involved with human interference? (think about manufacture, copy of an older copy, smartphone app developer, ...)
In fact, although unknown many digital Quranic copies contain many errors:

Since the appearance of the first digital copy of the holy Quran, there had been substantial effort to produce an accurate Quran text, but due to some difficulties (some of which are listed below), these efforts were unsuccessful in many of the cases, and unfortunately, the Quran texts appeared in a majority of Quranic websites and applications were suffering from lots of errors and typos.

These erroneous Quran texts were so rapidly spread over the Internet that finding the correct form of Quranic verses had became almost impossible without referring to a verified printed manuscript. For example, in early 2008, when somebody was searching Google for the verse 38 of Sura Al-Qalam which reads إِنَّ لَكُمْ فِيهِ لَمَا تَخَيَّرُونَ, the first result that he or she was receiving was a wrong form ending with the word يَتَخَيَّرُونَ as shown in the picture to the right.
This terrible situation made us to launch the Tanzil project to produce a highly verified error-free Quran text, and make this text available to the Quranic websites and applications to prevent further spreading of the erroneous Quran texts.

Source: http://tanzil.net/wiki/Tanzil_Project


Does your digital Quran copy contain any of these typo's in chapter two?

http://tanzil.net/pub/doc/typos/baqara.pdf

[huruf]

Diacritics may not have been written, but they were there, because they were pronnounced. The prophets did ot hand around, handsheets with written text to diseminate amongst the public. It was all speech, and speech certainy has all its vowels in it. That is why the Qur'an as we have is, as far as I can ascertain, compoletely guranteed, because only the present versions have reached us. If there had been several hands in it, we would have myriad of texts, as it happens with hadith. The slight variants in some vowelling or words do not change the value and meaning of the text, merely make it wider or clearer, do not destroy each other.

The written text is for the sake of a litterate population. As people become litterate they rely more and more on the written word and less and less on the spoken word. Material means also change habits from relaying on memory to relying on the printed text. In today's world, printed matter is cheap, pervading. But it was not so in the past. paper or papyrus or pergamen were far costlier to make. So was with lack of printing and relaying on hand copying, which itself wa prone to mistakes.

So printed diacritics might not be there, but the sounds were surely there.

Salaam