Père Zakaria Boutros
Episode 45

The linguistic miraculousness And grammatical errors Of the quran

The author      : Father Zakaria Boutros
The publisher:

The linguistic miraculousness of the quran is the main miraculousness as stated by Dr: Zaghlol Al-Najjar in his book (the verses of scientific miraculousness in the quran, part one, page 33}, it is a record of dialogues between him and Mr. Ahmed Farag in the Egyptian T.V, broadcasted on the year 2000 and 2001, he said:

[Each prophet or messenger has been granted special abilities and miracles what indicated his prophethood or mission that miracles were that characterized the people of his time]

1) Our master Moses, peace upon him, came in a time where magic was of great concern, so Al-mighty God granted him the knowledge to nullify the magic of the magicians

2) Our master Iesa, peace upon him, came in a time where medicine was of great concern, so Al-mighty God granted him the knowledge that was far superior to the knowledge of the physicians of his time

3) Our master Muhammad, peace upon him, came in a time where the main privilege characterized the people of the Arabic peninsula was the fluency ,eloquence and the good enunciation , so the quran came challenging the Arabs, being on the top of fluency , eloquence and the good enunciation to bring a similar quran …]

Concerning the linguistic miraculousness of the quran, we would like to inquire about some verses and what was mentioned in them from grammatical rules contradicting the Arabic language grammatical rules


( ??? ??? ?? Heaving of the name of An' (

A) In (Ta-Ha chapter (Surat Ta-Ha) 20: 63)" They said: "Verily! These are two magicians"

"????? ?? ???? ???????"  The original Arabic text

1) All of us know the basic grammatical rules stating that:
) With Ya' and Noun ????? ?????? ?????? Is raised ((??? ??)   the name of An'
     "?? ????"
) ?????? ?????? ??????(  heaved with Alif and Noun [?? ????.] But we find it

2) Imam Al-Nasfy commented on that saying: Omer had recited it

  "?? ???? ???????"
 It is apparent, but it was contradicting with the original quran, that's the ?? ???? quran of Othman, may God be pleased with him, as it said
{Al-Nasfy, part three, page 90}

3) Miss Aeisha, the mother of the believers, said when she was asked about that "O, my nephew, that's the work of the writers, they had been mistaken in the writing"
We are asking: where is the linguistic miraculousness of the quran with this clear error in the linguistic rules?
B) In the table chapter (Surat Al-Ma'idah') 69:" those who believe, the Jews and the Sabians and the Christians, - whosoever believed in Allah and the Last Day, and worked righteousness, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve"
The original Arabic text:  "?? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ????????? ???????? ?? ??? ????? ?????? ?????? ???? ????? ??? ???? ????? ??? ?? ??????"
1) the Sabians ???????? here is a noun heaved with "Wao and Noun" (??? ????? ?????? ??????) while it should be raised with "Ya' and Noun" (  (?????? ?????? ?????? meaning that it should be   " ????????"  as it is a joined on a raised  ((????? ??? ?????, as it is the name of An' (( ??? ??, and what complicated the matter more and more it was mentioned correctly in :

2) the cow chapter (Surat Al-Baqarah) 2: 62:"as the same verse was mentioned and within it the word (????????) is raises" ?????? " "those who believe, the Jews and the Sabians and the Christians, - whosoever believed in Allah and the Last Day, and worked righteousness, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve"
The original Arabic text:  "?? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ????????? ???????? ?? ??? ????? ?????? ?????? ???? ????? ??? ???? ????? ??? ?? ??????"


( ??? ?????? ) Raising the actor
"My Covenant could not be acquired by Zâlimûn (wrong-doers)."
The Arabic text: (?????? ???? ????????)

"Heaved with"Wao and Noun as it is a complete masculine plural
"????"", as it is the actor for the verb ??? ???? ????"
"????????" supposed to be "? ???????? "so the word "Zâlimûn
    ?????? ?????? ?????????!!!so how did it come raised by Ya' and Noun
And not heaved as it supposed to be

Many annotators tried to justify that in many unconvincing ways distorting the facts , for example Imam Al-Nasfy part 2,page 964 said : the meaning of the verse is "my covenant ( to be the imam ) could not acquire the Zâlimûn ( wrong doers) " making " covenant" as actor and the  Zâlimûn( wrong doers) to be the object which is heaved by "Ya' and
" ???? ????? ?? ???? ????" In the dictionary it is said that"  Noun
Means man who acquires things   and not the thing acquires man!! So we can't tell "the prize acquired the diligent " but the correct thing to say that" the diligent acquired the prize", so how could the covenant ( that's something) acquire the wrong doer and he is the person , that's unconvincing and wrong , we want to understand a logic convincing answer


(??? ??????? ??? ???????) on the Heaved    Raising the joined
 A) Women chapter (Surat An-Nisa') 4:162:"But those believers, believe in what has been sent down to you and what was sent down before you, and those who Mukimin (perform) As-Salât (prayer), and give Zakât (alms) and believe in Allah and in the Last Day, it is they to whom we shall give a great reward."
The Arabic text:
"... ????????? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????? ????????? ??????? ????????"
  ??????? ????????? ????? ?????? ?????? ????? ??????? ????? ?????"

??? ?? ???? ??????? ??? ???????  1) in this sentence the joined on the heaved should have been heaved
, has been excluded in the middle "???????? ??????"" so why ????????? ???????? ??????? ????????? ????? and the heaved in that verse are"
 "???????? And not!! "????????? ??????" Of the sentence, and came as raised and not heaved, as he should say

2) Al-Sagistany said on that verse in his book {Al-Masahef (the qurans, page 33)}: narrated Abdullah …from yazid, from hammed, from Alzoubair Abi-khaled his saying: I said to Aban Bin Othman: How did the {Women chapter (Surat An-Nisa') 162} come:
"... ????????? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????? ????????? ??????? ???????? ??????? ????????? ????? ?????? ?????"
   And what is after it are heaved, but it came as raised? How did this happen? He said: that was written ????????As what was before
, so I wrote it, as I was told to do!!!???????? By the writer, he asked him, then what should I write? He said to him: write

3) Also Al-Sagistany said: narrated Abdullah, from Abi-Mouawiya, from Hesham Bin Arowa from his father his saying: Miss Aeisha "she replied, O, my nephew ????????? ??????? ???????? ?????? was asked about the
 That's the work of the writers; they had been mistaken in the writing"{Al-Sagistany the book of {Al-Masahef (the qurans, page 34)

B) The cow chapter( Surat Al-Baqarah) 2:177:" It is not Al-Birr (piety) who believes in Allah … and who are Al- Mufoun (fulfilling) their covenant when they make it, and who are As-Sâbirin (the patient) in extreme poverty and ailment (disease) and at the time of fighting…"

The Arabic text:"
"???? ?????? ?? ??? ????? ... ???????? ?????? ??? ??????? ????????? ?? ???????? ???????? ????? ??????..."

  " ?????????" So he should say " ?????? Actually it should be heaved""?????????word" As-Sâbirin " the +
  Which is heaved   "???????"    As it is joined on Al- Mufoun

With reference to the different exegesis we can find really funny explanations, for example imam Al-Nasfy said: Al- Mufoun
"Up to here there is no problem, then "?? ??? and that is" "?????? ??? ????? ?????? is heaved" as it is joined on heaved" "???????"

 Saying that: it was raised as a pattern of compliment (part one, page 148) "??? ???????? He tried to justify raising As-Sâbirin"

?? Was not it a compliment as As-Sâbirin "??????? We are saying: why then this rule was not applied on the word Al- Mufoun "
"?????? ????? In either case there is a grammatical error as both words should take the same position in the linguistic analysis"

They are either raised together or heaved together on (????? ?????? ???? as both of them are joined and joined on (
!!!) {Al-Nasfy, part one, page 148} ??? ????? ????????? compliment and specification (

Actually the explanation of Imam Al-Nasfy in itself is a way of deceiving the simple people!!!

© pour la traduction française