Was the prophet Muhammad able to read and write?

[firedragon]

I meant to identify from the OP.
One has given several arguments. Which argument is proved from the internal substance of Quran.
Right, please?

Regards

None of the arguments have any evidence from the Quran. That's the whole point bro. You havent understood the OP.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I think you should first try asking questions without saying you say you lie, you say he lied or whatever. Yes?

It says thathluu kithaaban, you can easily see that its about a Kithab or a scripture. That does not say "you were illiterate" and neither does it mean "you couldnt write or read anything". It specifically says Kithab. A book. A scripture.

If the Quran wished to say he couldnt write or read anything it would have said "Ayyu Shayin". So it means scripture.

It is because he did not read any scripture before the Quran that he is a "Gentile" or an "Ummi Nabi". An ummi in this sense (Alif-Hamza, Meem, Ya) traditionally means one who has not or does not follow the mosaic traditions or scripture.

Thus, no brother, you should also think that this verse does not say "you cannot write", it says you "Did not" and it directly says Kithab or scripture. Read also the surrounding verses.

So you agree that, Muhammad did not read or write Scriptures before? Do you agree this is true? Then in that case you agree Quran is a revelation from God. Right?

 

[firedragon]

So you agree that, Muhammad did not read or write Scriptures before? Do you agree this is true? Then in that case you agree Quran is a revelation from God. Right?

Yep.

 

[j1i]

We can show Muhammad had advanced knowledge of the Curse of Moses (Deuteronomy 28), and how it was placed on the people of the book; when they sold their covenant for a small price (Zechariah 11).

Quran 5:32 Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors.

“Therefore the man was created singly, to teach that he who destroys one soul of a human being, the Scripture considers him as if he should destroy a whole world, and him who saves one soul of Israel, the Scripture considers him as if he should save a whole World.” (Babylonian Talmud).
There are ideas found in the Gospel of Barnabas, the Fake Gospel of John has a Gnostic edge, and there are contentions against some of the earlier church ideas from Gnostic writings.

There are more specific answers yet would have to read the Quran again, to be more specific, unless it comes to me at some point.

The Day of Reckoning, Day of the Lord, Resurrection of the Dead, Their faces will turn to fire in shock, etc, was all in Zoroastrian writings first.

No, Muhammad was on the Trade Routes had a knowledge of many ideas, and correlated the bits he knew into something cohesive.

The idea the Quran says this realm is a place of delusions, and desires (3:185) isn't Middle Eastern, it is Dharmic; it is the definition of the Maya.

In my opinion.

Thank you for your kind comments, my brother
I hope you give me an opportunity to participate

Regarding the Qur’an
Please do not rush to judge him

At the very least, read the unique information of the Qur’an, you will find that it contains completely different things from any source in any heavenly books and this is a fact that must be looked at.


Just a simple example
The Qur'an says that meteors falling on the planet contain copper (brass)
There is no heavenly book on the gospel, nor does the Bible give this information

Here is this verse
55:33 O society of jinn and humans! If you can pass through the bounds of the heavens and the earth, go ahead and pass. But you will not pass except with authorization.
55:34 So which of your Lord's marvels will you deny
35 You will be bombarded with flares of fire and brass, and you will not succeed.

have look at this or other websites
The Quran: Unchallangeable Miracle
then give me fair comparison

thanks
good luck

 

[Gharib]

Argument 1. A lot of people would have been illiterate at the time - Many people at that time would have been illiterate, but does that mean everyone was? So is it fair to make the argument that Muhammed or any single person was illiterate unless otherwise there was significant and clear evidence to the idea?

Not everyone was illiterate, the wealthy high class was not. Education and knowledge are highly emphasised in Islam so much so that literate prisoners of war were freed after having taught Muslims how to read and write.

Argument 2.

Ahadith say that he was illiterate - Yep. But aren't ahadith written a few centuries later? Thus, is that empirical evidence? Also, what about the ahadith that conflicts this notion like the one where the prophet apparently sees the gates of heaven and hell and sees certain things written on it and he narrates it. IF he couldn't read, how could he read what was written?

Ahadith being written a few centuries latter? I think you need to go back to your blackboard and revise this. There exist books of ahadith way way prior to those 'few centuries later' books.
Also, quote a hadith and it's source when you want to be taken seriously, seriously.

Argument 4.

He was illiterate, thats why the Quran is a miracle - Well, have you used your God given aqal to think if maybe people wanted to make a miracle out of something that may not have existed and made up a story along the way?

Just because he was illiterate doesn't make him stupid, stupid. The Qur'an is not a miracle because he was illiterate, the Qur'an is a miracle in it's own right.

Argument 5.

Scholars agree that he was illiterate - So what now? Scholars agree and you have lost your brain? You are speaking about Ijma. What is this Ijma based on? It is based on tradition that they pick and choose because there were Maliki scholars in Al Andalus who argued that the prophet Muhammed was literate. e.g. Scholar and Poet "Abu al Walid al Baji in his book Tahkik al madhhab".

This is no more different than your doctor saying stop smoking cause it causes you cancer. Have you lost your brain if you listen to him and quit smoking? If no, why? Maybe because that's what doctors generally study about, that's what their profession involves, knowing what damages the body. So too in the same regard Scholars are learned men, experts in the field of distinguishing between right and wrong, truth and falsehood.

Argument 6.

He dictated and got others to write - Well there is a difference in opinion among your own Islamic scholars on this. The hadith about him asking for a pen and paper at the death bed was ask someone else to write is too much of an effort to try and prove that he was illiterate. Its too much inference. He just asked for pen and paper. How in the world can you imagine that it was to get someone else to write? Well, one could argue that if he wanted a writer, he would have asked for a writer, not pen and paper.

Being who he was and having it known he was illiterate, I think asking for pen and paper is quite obvious to those around him what it really meant. It's like your beloved Queen of England saying 'we will come alone' when instead she means 'I will come alone' but because of royalty every dumb dumb out there understands what she means.

But do bring the hadith next time, this was on me this time.

Even in traditional schools of thought, blind taqleed is haram. I am using terms Muslims are used to in order to relate. Taqleed means to adhere to another persons school of thought. Aqal is the God given intellect a human being has to reason and think for himself. Different schools of thought have varying views on this in historical Islam.

So what do you think? Was this man an illiterate? Or is there no evidence to really prove that he was illiterate? What is this obsession about him being illiterate? Is it that people are so insecure that they want him to be an illiterate so badly they are willing to die for that cause of apologetics? Is it to make him a miracle when its unnecessary?

What say you brothers and sisters??

The problem here is when someone that thinks they know something, either due to being a former Muslim or just thinking they know something, doesn't actually know anything.
To follow a school of thought means to do 'taqleed' (to follow someones educated opinion), for a school of law to say that this is haram is laughable at best, don't ask me for the worst.

A muslim is prohibited in following someone in matters that are clear cut, such as pray Salah, fast Ramadan, there is no salah without wudu (ablution) etc etc. This is called using ones intellect, if there is someone that does not comprehend these, then they are exempt from any Islamic duties as they would either be a Non-Muslim to begin with or they would be mentally unfit or a child of young age.

The obsession here is that some Muslims who lack knowledge think that by presenting Muhamed alayhi salam as illiterate will give him more credit, they fail to understand that he was not stupid, but rather very smart. And their biggest fault is that they try to use this as an argument of his greatness to a non-believing crowd/audience when it is completely unnecessary. I have yet to hear of someone accepting Islam due to the illiteracy of Muhamed alayhi salam, but rather due to his intelligence and influence for change.

 

[firedragon]

Not everyone was illiterate, the wealthy high class was not.

Of course everyone was not illiterate. Its whats said in the comment you replied to.

Ahadith being written a few centuries latter? I think you need to go back to your blackboard and revise this. There exist books of ahadith way way prior to those 'few centuries later' books.

The earliest is Muwatta al Malik. So can you quote me Maliki transmissions to support whatever claim?

Just because he was illiterate doesn't make him stupid, stupid. The Qur'an is not a miracle because he was illiterate, the Qur'an is a miracle in it's own right.

You repeated what i said. Thanks.

This is no more different than your doctor saying stop smoking cause it causes you cancer. Have you lost your brain if you listen to him and quit smoking? If no, why? Maybe because that's what doctors generally study about, that's what their profession involves, knowing what damages the body. So too in the same regard Scholars are learned men, experts in the field of distinguishing between right and wrong, truth and falsehood.

thats why i quoted a scholar and his book. Do you disagree with him?

""there were Maliki scholars in Al Andalus who argued that the prophet Muhammed was literate. e.g. Scholar and Poet "Abu al Walid al Baji in his book Tahkik al madhhab".""

The problem here is when someone that thinks they know something, either due to being a former Muslim or just thinking they know something, doesn't actually know anything.
To follow a school of thought means to do 'taqleed' (to follow someones educated opinion), for a school of law to say that this is haram is laughable at best, don't ask me for the worst.

Well. If you think its laughable, please prove the oldest Sunni school of thought Maliki.

The obsession here is that some Muslims who lack knowledge think that by presenting Muhamed alayhi salam as illiterate will give him more credit,

Thats why the opennning post is against it. It seems you did not understand the OP.

Peace.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Yep.

So, finally we agree on something.
So, who was Muhammads teacher who taught Him reading and writing?

 

[Link]

Yep. That is actually another meaning. Ummal Kura does mean mother of towns but i am not 100% sure if that definitely refers to Mecca or if its a generic statement. Nevertheless, yes thats another possibility but dont you think for that meaning the word Umm should have a qualifying genitive noun to turn it into mean that type of meaning? An Ismu Majrooran is need to make it a mother of something.

I am also curious to know where its written that Muhammed was commanded not to read and write prior to the revelation of the Quran. Who commanded him and why must he obey someone?

Because as far as tradition goes, the first instance he was given revelation it was with the Quran (Not that i particularly believe it). Unless you believe another tradition and i am all ears.

Elyas (as) ordered him who was the Guide and leader during time between Isa (as) and Mohammad (pbuh&hf). He is the witness from Bani-Israel that also testified to Mohammad (pbuh&hf).

What Jesus (as) meant by Yahya/John being like or same as Elyas (as) is that John/Yahya (as) takes the place of the holy spirit from God by which God draws believers to Him through and the power by which God pushes people to goodness, the star, the light from the family of David/Aaron/Moses. So how did Elyas (as) come back and what is the proof? Well, because Jesus is leaving them until Mohammad (pbuh&hf) and so this was the purpose of why Elijah (as) was still alive and brought up by a whirl wind.

And this hinted in two places in Quran. One with the verse "And Zakariya, and Yahya and Isa and Elyas….", here these four are mentioned while it's obvious Yahya (as) succeeded Zakariya (as) in being the leader, and so did Jesus (as) succeed John (as), what is not obvious is why Elyas (as) has been mentioned here.

Many verses also say if Mohammad (pbuh&hf) was in doubt, he should ask or seek knowledge from those given the book before him, and given the book has three meanings in Quran, one as a people revealed the text to from a Prophet, or it has the meaning believers have the book as they been given insights from it and believe in it's miracle nature, or it has a meaning that the book is coupled with them as it gives them authority, the latter is true of the Messengers.

The family of the reminder before was the family of Moses/Aaron, and the most emphasized example of a family of reminder because of how Torah emphasizes on Abraham and his family, is the family of Abraham.

If you understand this, you see what is meant by Jesus sending an instance of the holy spirit other then himself (Elijah) while also talking about the Messenger to come later which is Mohammad clearly.

This is how Gospels talks about the divine guides like Moses, Aaron, all the way to Jesus, and Gospels through praising Jesus, was in fact, praising every other start of guidance from the family of David and every star of guidance starting from Adam.

And the chosen ones were chosen before Abraham was a human person on earth, so it's not about his bloodline. Rather, the bloodline has a purpose, to make it harder for liars to deceive they are chosen Prophets or leaders.

This is why Zakariya (as) prayed for Yahya (as) and didn't want it to be that Jesus (as) succeeds him directly, because he fear the rest of the inheritors (mawali) would claim more right then Jesus, but he wanted a son, that would prepare the way for Jesus (as) instead.

The Gospels are amazing and what Quran meant by Jesus (as) didn't die, is that, it appeared like he died and was crucified, but really, Jesus (as) was alive, maybe nailed, may his body by all natural rules should've died, but God did this miracle and we similarly Abraham (as) was put into fire, but didn't burn.

So same with Jesus (as), he was put on a cross and meant to be crucified and killed, but God never allowed him to leave this world, and he raised him instead like Idris (as) and Elyas (as), and Elyas (as). If you really really reflect on the words of the gospels, you will see, this exactly what the gospels are saying.

Anyways, I digress too much.

But the two places Elyas (as) mentioned and what sequence, speaks a lot, even though not much is said about Elyas (as) in the Quran!

 

[paarsurrey]

So, finally we agree on something.
So, who was Muhammads teacher who taught Him reading and writing?

It is a good question.

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

None of the arguments have any evidence from the Quran. That's the whole point bro. You havent understood the OP.

And only Quran is the most reliable source of the events of the time of Islam/Quran/Muhammad, it recorded the events as these happened. Whatever one wants to establish with certainty, one has to establish from within the Quran, else it is just one's conjecture. Right, please?

Regards

 

[firedragon]

So, finally we agree on something.
So, who was Muhammads teacher who taught Him reading and writing?

Dont know.

 

[firedragon]

And only Quran is the most reliable source of the events of the time of Islam/Quran/Muhammad, it recorded the events as these happened. Whatever one wants to establish with certainty, one has to establish from within the Quran, else it is just one's conjecture. Right, please?

Regards

Yes. You didnt understand the OP.

 

[firedragon]

Elyas (as) ordered him who was the Guide and leader during time between Isa (as) and Mohammad (pbuh&hf). He is the witness from Bani-Israel that also testified to Mohammad (pbuh&hf).

What Jesus (as) meant by Yahya/John being like or same as Elyas (as) is that John/Yahya (as) takes the place of the holy spirit from God by which God draws believers to Him through and the power by which God pushes people to goodness, the star, the light from the family of David/Aaron/Moses. So how did Elyas (as) come back and what is the proof? Well, because Jesus is leaving them until Mohammad (pbuh&hf) and so this was the purpose of why Elijah (as) was still alive and brought up by a whirl wind.

And this hinted in two places in Quran. One with the verse "And Zakariya, and Yahya and Isa and Elyas….", here these four are mentioned while it's obvious Yahya (as) succeeded Zakariya (as) in being the leader, and so did Jesus (as) succeed John (as), what is not obvious is why Elyas (as) has been mentioned here.

Many verses also say if Mohammad (pbuh&hf) was in doubt, he should ask or seek knowledge from those given the book before him, and given the book has three meanings in Quran, one as a people revealed the text to from a Prophet, or it has the meaning believers have the book as they been given insights from it and believe in it's miracle nature, or it has a meaning that the book is coupled with them as it gives them authority, the latter is true of the Messengers.

The family of the reminder before was the family of Moses/Aaron, and the most emphasized example of a family of reminder because of how Torah emphasizes on Abraham and his family, is the family of Abraham.

If you understand this, you see what is meant by Jesus sending an instance of the holy spirit other then himself (Elijah) while also talking about the Messenger to come later which is Mohammad clearly.

This is how Gospels talks about the divine guides like Moses, Aaron, all the way to Jesus, and Gospels through praising Jesus, was in fact, praising every other start of guidance from the family of David and every star of guidance starting from Adam.

And the chosen ones were chosen before Abraham was a human person on earth, so it's not about his bloodline. Rather, the bloodline has a purpose, to make it harder for liars to deceive they are chosen Prophets or leaders.

This is why Zakariya (as) prayed for Yahya (as) and didn't want it to be that Jesus (as) succeeds him directly, because he fear the rest of the inheritors (mawali) would claim more right then Jesus, but he wanted a son, that would prepare the way for Jesus (as) instead.

The Gospels are amazing and what Quran meant by Jesus (as) didn't die, is that, it appeared like he died and was crucified, but really, Jesus (as) was alive, maybe nailed, may his body by all natural rules should've died, but God did this miracle and we similarly Abraham (as) was put into fire, but didn't burn.

So same with Jesus (as), he was put on a cross and meant to be crucified and killed, but God never allowed him to leave this world, and he raised him instead like Idris (as) and Elyas (as), and Elyas (as). If you really really reflect on the words of the gospels, you will see, this exactly what the gospels are saying.

Anyways, I digress too much.

But the two places Elyas (as) mentioned and what sequence, speaks a lot, even though not much is said about Elyas (as) in the Quran!

Brother. Thats great, but isnt it irrelevant to the Muhammad sal being an Ummi?

 

[paarsurrey]

Sure.

Out of those arguments made by those who believe the prophet was illiterate (thats most of the muslims around the world) the only one is about the Ummi Nabi quote in the Quran.

Heres the original arabic text from the Al Mushaf al madinah. Bro, i will furnish this but a simple reference would have sufficed because everyone in the world can access the Quran with a reference. Anyway, here it is.

View attachment 35278


Translations

[with unlettered rendition posed as argument]

“Those who follow the messenger, the unlettered (Ummy) Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures),- in the law and the Gospel;- for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil; he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); He releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them...”

[with Ummi translated as gentile]: Those who follow the messenger, the gentile prophet, whom they find written for them in the Torah and the Gospel; he orders them to kindness, and prohibits them from vice, and he makes permissible for them the good things, and he makes forbidden for them the nasty things, and he removes their burden and the shackles that are upon them. So those who believe in him, and support him, and help him persevere, and follow the light that was sent down with him; these are the successful ones.

Friend @firedragon !

1. Are the translations of the natural Arabic word "ummy" as "unlettered Prophet" and "the gentile prophet" contradictory to one another, please?
2. What one understands from the word "gentile", for sure?
3. Is the natural Arabic word "ummy" mentioned only once in Quran? If it has been mentioned more than once, then one shall have to see the context of the text at every place it has been mentioned, some verses preceding and some following, in which it has been used.
4. Quran mentions clearly that G-d uses different styles and different phrases/words to make the clarity on an issue. Did one try to investigate it on these lines, please?

If one has not thought on these points, one should try them now . Right, please?

Regards
_____________
~The triliteral root hamza mīm mīm (أ م م) occurs 119 times in the Quran.
~six times as the nominal ummiīī (أُمِّىّ)
"Nominal - unlettered, unable to read
(1) Noun
(2:78:2) ummiyyūna (are) unlettered ones وَمِنْهُمْ أُمِّيُّونَ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ الْكِتَابَ إِلَّا أَمَانِيَّ
(3:20:13) wal-umiyīna and the unlettered people وَقُلْ لِلَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ وَالْأُمِّيِّينَ أَأَسْلَمْتُمْ
(3:75:29) l-umiyīna the unlettered people ذَٰلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمْ قَالُوا لَيْسَ عَلَيْنَا فِي الْأُمِّيِّينَ سَبِيلٌ
(62:2:5) l-umiyīna the unlettered هُوَ الَّذِي بَعَثَ فِي الْأُمِّيِّينَ رَسُولًا مِنْهُمْ
(2) Adjective
(7:157:5) l-umiya the unlettered الَّذِينَ يَتَّبِعُونَ الرَّسُولَ النَّبِيَّ الْأُمِّيَّ
(7:158:24) l-umiyi the unlettered فَآمِنُوا بِاللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ النَّبِيِّ الْأُمِّيِّ الَّذِي يُؤْمِنُ بِاللَّ"
http://corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=Amm

 

[firedragon]

Friend @firedragon !

1. Are the translations of the natural Arabic word "ummy" as "unlettered Prophet" and "the gentile prophet" contradictory to one another, please?
2. What one understands from the word "gentile", for sure?
3. Is the natural Arabic word "ummy" mentioned only once in Quran? If it has been mentioned more than once, then one shall have to see the context of the text at every place it has been mentioned, some verses preceding and some following, in which it has been used.
4. Quran mentions clearly that G-d uses different styles and different phrases/words to make the clarity on an issue. Did one try to investigate it on these lines, please?

1. If the arabic phrase is "Ummiyoona wa amyuunu", then that could be a contradiction. Since its one word Ummi, it is not a contradiction, one of the translations is plain wrong. It cant be both.

2. Yes. For sure.
3. Yes. Every place has been analysed by many.
4. Yes. Many investigations.

 

[Link]

Brother. Thats great, but isnt it irrelevant to the Muhammad sal being an Ummi?

It was to the point, who ordered him to not read books or write. The Prophet didn't read or write a book before Quran, so the first words was a relief of that, and commanded him to read.

 

[firedragon]

It was to the point, who ordered him to not read books or write. The Prophet didn't read or write a book before Quran, so the first words was a relief of that, and commanded him to read.

Okay i understand. But It says thathluu kithaaban, you can easily see that its about a Kithab or a scripture. That does not say "you were illiterate" and neither does it mean "you couldnt write or read anything". It specifically says Kithab. A book. A scripture.

If the Quran wished to say he couldnt write or read anything it would have said "Ayyu Shayin". So it means scripture.

It is because he did not read any scripture before the Quran that he is a "Gentile" or an "Ummi Nabi". An ummi in this sense (Alif-Hamza, Meem, Ya) traditionally means one who has not or does not follow the mosaic traditions or scripture.

Thus, no brother, you should also think that this verse does not say "you cannot write", it says you "Did not" and it directly says Kithab or scripture. Read also the surrounding verses.

 

[Link]

Kitaab can mean writing as well.

 

[firedragon]

Kitaab can mean writing as well.

If you take generally in simple arabic terms kithab means book. But take this verse 29:48. Begin from a few verses earlier. When it says in Uthla maa uuhiya or recite from what has been revealed to you "min al Kithaabi" it means scripture. So we must read the context. At least thesurroundinng verses. So in this matter, it is not speaking of any book. Its speaking of scripture.

And it says "La thujaadhiloo ahlal kithaabi" so on that matter is the Quran speaking of a reader or writer of "any book"? No. You know very well what Ahlal Kithaabi means.

The whole thinng is speaking of scripture. Not just any book.

Amanna bialladhi unzila ilainaa wa unzila ilaikum, believe in what was sent down/revealed to us and what was revealed to you". So what was anzala? What was sent down? Which book was sent down?

Its scripture. So thats why the verse 29:48 is speaking about scripture.

 

[Gharib]

@firedragon help me understand you, are you a muslim?

You keep quoting a scholar/poet from Andalus. I mentioned to you the Madhhabs, a collective of Scholars and you reject this yet are so quick to "blindly" follow just a single person with an opposing view and reject the thousands.

Moreover, the Maliki madhhab was neither the first of the madhhabs nor is it the oldest of the 4 surviving madhhabs.

Written hadith have existed for a long time. Each Imam and Scholar had written copies of what they had memorised, they were good at memorising but lets not make them superhuman and say they memorised everything they heard and did not need having them written down.

Imam Malik himself as a student would write down the hadith narrated by his teacher and go home to memorise them then go back to narrate them in his presence. This is just one example and this is from a person that lived and died in Medina.