This is in answer to Wail Ibrahim's rebuttal.

>       The First Error In 5:69 "Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina
>       haaduu was-Saabi'uuna wan-Nasaaraa man 'aamana bilaahi
>       wal-Yawmil-'Aakhiri wa 'amila saali-hanfalaa khaw-fun
>       'alay-him wa laa hum yah-zanuun."
>       There is a grammatical error in the above verse. The word
>       Saabi'uuna has been declined wrongly... In two other verses, the
>       same word, in exactly the same grammatical setting was
>       declined correctly.
>Correctly and differently--nothing wrong with that. Just because words
>appear in the same "grammatical setting" does not mean that they have to
>be used exactly the same way. In Arabic as in English, there is more than one
>gramatically correct way to say the same thing even with similar words.
>(e.g."He hurriedly went to the market" or "He went to the market in a hurry";
>in one case an adverbial form of HURRY is used and in one case a NOUN form
>is used, with an equivalent meaning.This is a matter of *style*.)

You must compare apples with apples. If you want to make an analogy that fits the two verses in question with the same grammatical setting, your explanation should be something like this:

That is the kind of error we have in the the Qur'an.

>       You notice that the word was written Saabi'uuna in 5:69 and
>       was written Saabi'iina in 2:62 and 22:17. In the last two verses
>       the word was declined correctly because the word inna in the
>       beginning of the sentence causes a form of declension called
>       "nasb" (as in cases of accusative or subjunctive) and the "yeh"
>       is the "sign of nasb". But the word Saabi'uuna in 5:69 was given
>       the 'uu, waw which is the sign of "raf'a" (as in cases of
>       nominative or indicative). This then is an obvious grammatical
>       error.
>This is not an error. Abu Jafar Al-Nahhas in A2raab al-Qur'an[1] explains
>that what is meant here is "innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu man
>'aamana bilaahi MIN-HUM wal-Yawmil-'Aakhiri wa 'amila saali-han falahum
>ajruhum ... was-Saabi'uuna wan-Nasaaraa KA-ZALIK..." (capitals are words
>inserted not in Qur'an to clarify meaning), with the meaning "Surely they
>that believe, and those of Jewry, whosoever believes in God and the Last
>Day, and works righteousness, no fear shall be on them, neither shall they
>sorrow, and the Sabaeans, and the Christians LIKEWISE."

You can try every trick in the book. But here again if we use your previous example of

Using your method of reasoning we can say that he go to the market is not an error because we can insert "can" or "did" after the word "go", and thus the sentence becomes:

And that then is perfect English. Try using this in the next article you write and see if your editor or readers will correct it for you or not. Or if you are a teacher of Arabic please do not mark your students down for similar constructions to that of the Qur'an.

By inserting additional words in the Qur'anic text, both you and Abu Jafar Al-Nahhas are admitting that there is something that needs to be put straight in this sentence. Remember that which is already perfect cannot be added to and cannot be taken from to be made perfect. Al-kamel la yaqbal azzyadeh wala an-noqsan. The author of this article knows the rules but he is willfully chooses to ignore the facts. Some early Muslims have seen some of these errors and called them errors. But after the Qur'an has gained a "divine" immunity no one can dare call them errors.

It is a waste of time for me to go over his fangled attempts in order to show that he is wrong.

>This in no way contradicts using the words with a different style
>resulting with a different grammatical declination in other similar verses.
>Abu Jafar goes on to quote pre-Islamic Arabic poetry with a similar
>structure (a nominative used after a participle normally requiring the
>accusative) but it would be lengthy to quote and explain.

And it is our argument that the Qur'an is no different from the pre-Islamic poetry when it comes to grammar. Both can have the same errors. Appealing to an error in the poetry of jaheliah does NOT correct an error in the Qur'an.

Articles by M. Rafiqul-Haqq and P. Newton
Answering Islam Home Page