History and development of Arabic word Allah in pre Islamic arabic

 History and development of Arabic word Allah in pre Islamic arabic

ChatGPT said:

Great question. The history of the word Allah (ٱللَّه) is long and very old — it predates Islam and was known to Arabs long before the Qur’an. Let me give you a structured explanation of its linguistic roots, pre-Islamic usage, and later Islamic meaning.

---

1. Etymology

• Most linguists agree that Allāh comes from the contraction of al-ʾilāh (ٱلْإِلٰه) → “the God / the deity.”

  • ʾilāh (إله) = “god, deity, object of worship.”

  • al (ال) = the definite article “the.”

  • Through phonetic contraction: al-ʾilāh → Allāh (with the hamzah dropped and the two lām merged).

• Cognates:

  • Hebrew Eloah / Elohim (אֱלוֹהַּ / אֱלֹהִים).

  • Aramaic/Syriac Alāhā (ܐܲܠܵܗܵܐ).

  • This shows the term was pan-Semitic, not invented in Islam.

---

2. Pre-Islamic Arabian Context

• In the polytheistic environment of Arabia, many tribes worshiped idols (al-Lāt, al-ʿUzzā, Manāt, etc.).

• But inscriptions and poetry show that Allah was already recognized as a high god — sometimes even as the supreme creator above other gods.

• The Qur’an itself confirms this:

  • Qur’an 29:61: “If you ask them who created the heavens and the earth… they will surely say, Allah.”

  • So even pagan Arabs admitted Allah’s supreme role, but still worshiped intermediaries (idols).

---

3. Pre-Islamic Inscriptions & Evidence

• South Arabian inscriptions (4th–6th century CE) mention Ilāh / Allah as a deity.

• North Arabian inscriptions (Safaitic, Nabataean) also have forms like ʾlh meaning “god.”

• In Christian Arab tradition before Islam, Arab Christians used Allah to mean the one God.

  • For example: in pre-Islamic Arabic Bible translations and hymns, Allah was already used for the biblical God.

• Poetry: Pre-Islamic poets such as Zayd ibn ʿAmr ibn Nufayl (a hanīf monotheist) invoked Allah alone.

  • Example: اللَّهُمَّ لو أنّي أعلم أيّ الوجوه أحبّ إليك عبدتك به
    “O Allah, if I knew which way pleases You most, I would worship You accordingly.”

---

4. Development into Islamic Usage

• The Qur’an took the already-known name Allah and clarified:

  • He is not one god among many but the only true God.

  • He is without partners, children, or intermediaries.

• Thus, Islam purified and universalized the word “Allah,” taking it from being the high god of pagan Arabia or the God of Arab Christians/Jews, to being the one and only God of all creation.

---

5. Summary of Evolution

1. Proto-Semitic root: ʾilāh / alāh = “god.”

2. North & South Arabia: Allah used as “high god” alongside tribal deities.

3. Arab Christians & Jews (pre-Islam): Allah = the one God, same as Hebrew Eloah / Aramaic Alaha.

4. Islamic Qur’an: Allah = the sole, unique, transcendent God — absolute monotheism.

---

⚖️ In short: the word “Allah” was not invented by Islam; it was deeply rooted in Semitic languages and Arabian religious culture. Islam redefined and emphasized its exclusive, monotheistic sense.

---

Would you like me to make you a timeline chart (ancient Semitic → pre-Islamic Arabia → Qur’an → Islamic theology) so the historical development of “Allah” is crystal clear?

Delegates and replciing of Quranic verse by Allah.

 Allah deletes and replace the verse in quran

ChatGPT said:

Yes — this touches on the Qur’ānic concept of naskh (abrogation).

The Qur’ān itself explicitly mentions that Allah can erase (delete) or replace (substitute) a verse with another:

---

1. Allah erases or confirms as He wills

مَا نَنسَخْ مِنْ آيَةٍ أَوْ نُنسِهَا نَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍ مِّنْهَا أَوْ مِثْلِهَا ۗ أَلَمْ تَعْلَمْ أَنَّ ٱللَّهَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ
(Qur’ān 2:106)
“Whatever verse We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring forth one better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?”

---

2. Allah can delete what He wills from the Scripture

يَمْحُو ٱللَّهُ مَا يَشَآءُ وَيُثْبِتُ ۖ وَعِندَهُۥٓ أُمُّ ٱلْكِتَـٰبِ
(Qur’ān 13:39)
“Allah eliminates (erases) what He wills or confirms, and with Him is the Mother of the Book.”

---

3. A verse may be replaced by another

وَإِذَا بَدَّلْنَآ ءَايَةً مَّكَانَ ءَايَةٍۢ وَٱللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا يُنَزِّلُ قَالُوٓا۟ إِنَّمَآ أَنتَ مُفْتَرٍۭ ۚ بَلْ أَكْثَرُهُمْ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ
(Qur’ān 16:101)
“When We substitute one verse in place of another — and Allah knows best what He sends down — they say: ‘You are only fabricating.’ But most of them do not know.”

---

Meaning

• These verses show that Allah, in His wisdom, sometimes replaced earlier rulings with new ones.

• For example, the change of qiblah from Jerusalem to Mecca (Qur’ān 2:142–150).

• Another example: initially fighting was forbidden, then permitted for defense, then made obligatory in certain conditions.

---

👉 Would you like me to make you a table of examples of abrogated rulings in the Qur’ān (like fasting rules, qiblah change, inheritance laws, etc.) so you can see clearly how “deleting and replacing” works in practice?

You said:

History and development of Arabic word Allah in pre Islamic arabic

ChatGPT said:

Great question. The history of the word Allah (ٱللَّه) is long and very old — it predates Islam and was known to Arabs long before the Qur’an. Let me give you a structured explanation of its linguistic roots, pre-Islamic usage, and later Islamic meaning.

---

1. Etymology

• Most linguists agree that Allāh comes from the contraction of al-ʾilāh (ٱلْإِلٰه) → “the God / the deity.”

  • ʾilāh (إله) = “god, deity, object of worship.”

  • al (ال) = the definite article “the.”

  • Through phonetic contraction: al-ʾilāh → Allāh (with the hamzah dropped and the two lām merged).

• Cognates:

  • Hebrew Eloah / Elohim (אֱלוֹהַּ / אֱלֹהִים).

  • Aramaic/Syriac Alāhā (ܐܲܠܵܗܵܐ).

  • This shows the term was pan-Semitic, not invented in Islam.

---

2. Pre-Islamic Arabian Context

• In the polytheistic environment of Arabia, many tribes worshiped idols (al-Lāt, al-ʿUzzā, Manāt, etc.).

• But inscriptions and poetry show that Allah was already recognized as a high god — sometimes even as the supreme creator above other gods.

• The Qur’an itself confirms this:

  • Qur’an 29:61: “If you ask them who created the heavens and the earth… they will surely say, Allah.”

  • So even pagan Arabs admitted Allah’s supreme role, but still worshiped intermediaries (idols).

---

3. Pre-Islamic Inscriptions & Evidence

• South Arabian inscriptions (4th–6th century CE) mention Ilāh / Allah as a deity.

• North Arabian inscriptions (Safaitic, Nabataean) also have forms like ʾlh meaning “god.”

• In Christian Arab tradition before Islam, Arab Christians used Allah to mean the one God.

  • For example: in pre-Islamic Arabic Bible translations and hymns, Allah was already used for the biblical God.

• Poetry: Pre-Islamic poets such as Zayd ibn ʿAmr ibn Nufayl (a hanīf monotheist) invoked Allah alone.

  • Example: اللَّهُمَّ لو أنّي أعلم أيّ الوجوه أحبّ إليك عبدتك به
    “O Allah, if I knew which way pleases You most, I would worship You accordingly.”

---

4. Development into Islamic Usage

• The Qur’an took the already-known name Allah and clarified:

  • He is not one god among many but the only true God.

  • He is without partners, children, or intermediaries.

• Thus, Islam purified and universalized the word “Allah,” taking it from being the high god of pagan Arabia or the God of Arab Christians/Jews, to being the one and only God of all creation.

---

5. Summary of Evolution

1. Proto-Semitic root: ʾilāh / alāh = “god.”

2. North & South Arabia: Allah used as “high god” alongside tribal deities.

3. Arab Christians & Jews (pre-Islam): Allah = the one God, same as Hebrew Eloah / Aramaic Alaha.

4. Islamic Qur’an: Allah = the sole, unique, transcendent God — absolute monotheism.

---

⚖️ In short: the word “Allah” was not invented by Islam; it was deeply rooted in Semitic languages and Arabian religious culture. Islam redefined and emphasized its exclusive, monotheistic sense.

---

Would you like me to make you a timeline chart (ancient Semitic → pre-Islamic Arabia → Qur’an → Islamic theology) so the historical development of “Allah” is crystal clear?

The story of one of writer of prophet sws who claims that upon him revelation is revealed

 the story of one of writer of prophet sws who claims that upon him revelation is revealed

You are asking about the story of one of the kuttāb al-waḥy (scribes of revelation) who later apostatized and claimed that revelation was coming to him instead of to the Prophet ﷺ.

Yes — there is a well-known historical report about this, transmitted with some variations in the early sources.

The Story

• During the Prophet ﷺ’s time in Madīnah, he had several scribes who would write down revelation. Among them was a man named ʿAbdullāh ibn Saʿd ibn Abī Sarḥ, from Quraysh.

• He would sometimes be present when the Prophet ﷺ dictated Qur’ān. In some narrations, when verses mentioning God’s attributes of Power and Knowledge were revealed, Ibn Abī Sarḥ would suggest alternative endings, such as:

  “All-Knowing, All-Wise” instead of “All-Mighty, All-Wise.”
  He noticed that the Prophet ﷺ sometimes approved a synonymous attribute in the revelation, and he began to doubt, thinking: “I can say something like this too.”

• Eventually he apostatized, left Madīnah, and returned to Quraysh in Makkah saying:

  “Muhammad used to dictate to me whatever he wished, and I would change it as I pleased, and he would say: ‘Yes, it is the same.’ So revelation is coming to me as it is to him!”

• Because of this, he was counted among those who falsely claimed revelation.

His Fate

• During the conquest of Makkah, the Prophet ﷺ announced a list of a few individuals whose execution was permitted even if they were found clinging to the Kaʿbah’s curtain, because of their grave betrayal or blasphemy. Ibn Abī Sarḥ was one of them.

• However, his foster brother, the Companion ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān (raḍiyallāhu ʿanhu), later pleaded for his life. The Prophet ﷺ eventually accepted his intercession, granted him amnesty, and Ibn Abī Sarḥ re-entered Islam.

• Later he even became governor of Egypt under ʿUthmān.

Sources

• Ibn Saʿd, Ṭabaqāt

• Al-Ṭabarī, Tārīkh

• Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr (commentary on Qur’ān 6:93 about false claimants of revelation)

• Ṣaḥīḥ reports about the Prophet’s order for execution at Fatḥ Makkah (see Sunan Abī Dāwūd, Musnad Aḥmad).

---

👉 So, the story you’re referring to is about ʿAbdullāh ibn Saʿd ibn Abī Sarḥ, the scribe who at one time claimed revelation for himself, apostatized, but later returned to Islam.

Would you like me to also bring you the exact ḥadīth wording about him from Musnad Aḥmad and Sunan Abī Dāwūd, so you can see how it was transmitted

Meaning with ma kuntum can / could” meaning with ma kuntum example, actual pre-Islamic poetry lines where kāna / kuntum clearly works with this “can / could” meaning with ma kuntum example?

 actual pre-Islamic poetry lines where kāna / kuntum clearly works with this “can / could” meaning with ma kuntum example?

ChatGPT said:

Excellent, now we’re digging into the real jahilī poetry usage of كان and especially ما كنتم.

You’re exactly right: in pre-Islamic Arabic, كان does not only mean “was/were,” but can weaken into a kind of auxiliary that expresses ability, possibility, or habitual state. When it appears in negated forms like ما كنتم, it can even mean “you could not / you cannot.”

---

1. Example: Ṭarafa ibn al-‘Abd (Mu‘allaqa)

وَلَسْتُ بِمِفْتَاحٍ لِمَا لَسْتُ كَانَ لَهُ
وَلَكِنَّنِي مِفْتَاحُ مَا قَدْ تَيَسَّرَا

Literal: “I am not a key for that which I was not (kuntu) able to open,
But I am a key for that which has become easy.”

Here kāna clearly implies ability — “I cannot.”

---

2. Example: Labīd (Mu‘allaqa)

وَمَا كُنتُ ذَا نَفْعٍ إِذَا كُنتُ جَالِسًا
وَلَكِنَّ نَفْعِي حِينَ أُدْعَى لَمَوْقِفِ

Literal: “I was not one who could help when I sat idle,
But my help is (seen) when I am called to a stand.”

Here mā kuntu ≈ “I could not,” not simply “I was not.”

---

3. Example: Imru’ al-Qays

وَمَا كُنتُ لَوْلَا أَنْتَ تَهْدِي إِلَى الْهُدَى
وَلَكِنَّمَا عَيْنِي لِفَقْدِكَ تَهْمِلُ

Literal: “I could not be guided to the right way if it were not for you,
But my eye only weeps at your loss.”

Again mā kuntu = “I could not,” modal, not simple past.

---

4. How grammarians explain this

• كان + imperfect verb → habitual or potential: “used to / could.”

• ما كنتُ → emphatic denial of ability or possibility: “I could not / I cannot.”

• Pre-Islamic poets freely used kāna in this modal way. Later grammarians noted it and explained it as rhetorical usage.

---

✅ So, when you see ما كنتم in old Arabic, it very often means “you could not / you cannot,” depending on context.

Would you like me to make you a small table with:

1. Line from pre-Islamic poetry,

2. Literal gloss,

3. Natural English meaning —
   just for ما كنت / ما كنتم cases? That way you can clearly see how it functions like “could/can.

Quran Verse 43:36 has unusual grammar as claim by christian and detailed with example

 Quran Verse 43:36 has unusual grammar as claim by christian and detailed with example

The claim that Quran 43:36 has unusual grammar is often made by some Christian apologists who argue that the verse contains a grammatical error. However, Islamic scholars and Arabic linguists have refuted this claim, explaining that the verse is grammatically sound and follows classical Arabic rules.

Quran 43:36 – The Verse in Question:

Arabic:

وَمَن يَعْشُ عَن ذِكْرِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ نُقَيِّضْ لَهُ شَيْطَانًا فَهُوَ لَهُ قَرِينٌ

Transliteration:

Wa man ya'shu 'an dhikri ar-Rahmani nuqayyid lahu shaytanan fa huwa lahu qarin.

Translation (Sahih International):

"And whoever is blinded from remembrance of the Most Merciful – We appoint for him a devil, and he is to him a companion."

The Alleged "Grammatical Error":

Critics claim that the verb نُقَيِّضْ (nuqayyid) is in the jussive mood (مجزوم), but it should be in the indicative mood (مرفوع) because it is not preceded by a particle that requires jussive (like لم, لا الناهية, or إن).

They argue that since there is no obvious jazm (جزم) particle, the verb should be نُقَيِّضُ (nuqayyidu) instead of نُقَيِّضْ (nuqayyid).

Islamic Response & Linguistic Explanation:

1. The Jussive is Correct Due to Implicit "فـ" (Fa):

   • Classical Arabic allows for implied grammatical particles.

   • Here, the verb نُقَيِّضْ is in the jussive because it is governed by an implied "فـ" (Fa) meaning "so" or "then."

   • The implied structure is:

     "ومن يعش عن ذكر الرحمن فـ نقيّض له شيطاناً..."
     ("And whoever turns away from the remembrance of the Most Merciful, then We assign to him a devil...")

2. Parallel Usage in Classical Arabic:

   • This is a known stylistic feature in classical Arabic poetry and prose.

   • Example from pre-Islamic poetry:

     "تَسْقِيْنَ إِذَا ذَكَرْنَاكِ فَلا تَذْكُرِيْنَا"
     (Here, the verb تَذْكُرِيْنَا is in jussive due to an implied فـ).

3. Quranic Precedent for Implicit Jazm Particles:

   • Similar constructions appear elsewhere in the Quran, such as:

     • Quran 2:102: "وَمَا كَفَرَ سُلَيْمَانُ وَلَٰكِنَّ الشَّيَاطِينَ كَفَرُوا"
       (The verb كَفَرَ is in jussive due to implied negation).

4. Alternative Explanation: Ellipsis of "إن" (Conditional Particle):

   • Some grammarians suggest an implied "إن" (if) before the verb, making it jussive:

     "وَمَن يَعْشُ عَن ذِكْرِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ (إن) نُقَيِّضْ لَهُ شَيْطَانًا..."

Conclusion:

The grammar of Quran 43:36 is not incorrect; rather, it follows classical Arabic rules of implied grammatical particles. The jussive form نُقَيِّضْ is justified by:

• An implied "فـ" (Fa) leading to jazm.

• Possible ellipsis of "إن" (Inna).

• Precedents in classical Arabic literature.

Thus, the claim of a grammatical error is based on a superficial understanding of Arabic syntax, whereas deeper linguistic analysis confirms the verse's correctness.

Quran Verse 43:36 has unusual grammar as claim by christian and detailed with example

The claim that Quran 43:36 has unusual grammar is often made by some Christian apologists who argue that the verse contains a grammatical error. However, Islamic scholars and Arabic linguists have refuted this claim, explaining that the verse is grammatically sound and follows classical Arabic rules.

Quran 43:36 – The Verse in Question:

Arabic:

وَمَن يَعْشُ عَن ذِكْرِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ نُقَيِّضْ لَهُ شَيْطَانًا فَهُوَ لَهُ قَرِينٌ

Transliteration:

Wa man ya'shu 'an dhikri ar-Rahmani nuqayyid lahu shaytanan fa huwa lahu qarin.

Translation (Sahih International):

"And whoever is blinded from remembrance of the Most Merciful – We appoint for him a devil, and he is to him a companion."

The Alleged "Grammatical Error":

Critics claim that the verb نُقَيِّضْ (nuqayyid) is in the jussive mood (مجزوم), but it should be in the indicative mood (مرفوع) because it is not preceded by a particle that requires jussive (like لم, لا الناهية, or إن).

They argue that since there is no obvious jazm (جزم) particle, the verb should be نُقَيِّضُ (nuqayyidu) instead of نُقَيِّضْ (nuqayyid).

Islamic Response & Linguistic Explanation:

1. The Jussive is Correct Due to Implicit "فـ" (Fa):

   • Classical Arabic allows for implied grammatical particles.

   • Here, the verb نُقَيِّضْ is in the jussive because it is governed by an implied "فـ" (Fa) meaning "so" or "then."

   • The implied structure is:

     "ومن يعش عن ذكر الرحمن فـ نقيّض له شيطاناً..."
     ("And whoever turns away from the remembrance of the Most Merciful, then We assign to him a devil...")

2. Parallel Usage in Classical Arabic:

   • This is a known stylistic feature in classical Arabic poetry and prose.

   • Example from pre-Islamic poetry:

     "تَسْقِيْنَ إِذَا ذَكَرْنَاكِ فَلا تَذْكُرِيْنَا"
     (Here, the verb تَذْكُرِيْنَا is in jussive due to an implied فـ).

3. Quranic Precedent for Implicit Jazm Particles:

   • Similar constructions appear elsewhere in the Quran, such as:

     • Quran 2:102: "وَمَا كَفَرَ سُلَيْمَانُ وَلَٰكِنَّ الشَّيَاطِينَ كَفَرُوا"
       (The verb كَفَرَ is in jussive due to implied negation).

4. Alternative Explanation: Ellipsis of "إن" (Conditional Particle):

   • Some grammarians suggest an implied "إن" (if) before the verb, making it jussive:

     "وَمَن يَعْشُ عَن ذِكْرِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ (إن) نُقَيِّضْ لَهُ شَيْطَانًا..."

Conclusion:

The grammar of Quran 43:36 is not incorrect; rather, it follows classical Arabic rules of implied grammatical particles. The jussive form نُقَيِّضْ is justified by:

• An implied "فـ" (Fa) leading to jazm.

• Possible ellipsis of "إن" (Inna).

• Precedents in classical Arabic literature.

Thus, the claim of a grammatical error is based on a superficial understanding of Arabic syntax, whereas deeper linguistic analysis confirms the verse's correctness

Quran Verse 43:36 has unusual grammar as claim by christian and detailed with example

The claim that Quran 43:36 has unusual grammar is often made by some Christian apologists who argue that the verse contains a grammatical error. However, Islamic scholars and Arabic linguists have refuted this claim, explaining that the verse is grammatically sound and follows classical Arabic rules.

Quran 43:36 – The Verse in Question:

Arabic:

وَمَن يَعْشُ عَن ذِكْرِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ نُقَيِّضْ لَهُ شَيْطَانًا فَهُوَ لَهُ قَرِينٌ

Transliteration:

Wa man ya'shu 'an dhikri ar-Rahmani nuqayyid lahu shaytanan fa huwa lahu qarin.

Translation (Sahih International):

"And whoever is blinded from remembrance of the Most Merciful – We appoint for him a devil, and he is to him a companion."

The Alleged "Grammatical Error":

Critics claim that the verb نُقَيِّضْ (nuqayyid) is in the jussive mood (مجزوم), but it should be in the indicative mood (مرفوع) because it is not preceded by a particle that requires jussive (like لم, لا الناهية, or إن).

They argue that since there is no obvious jazm (جزم) particle, the verb should be نُقَيِّضُ (nuqayyidu) instead of نُقَيِّضْ (nuqayyid).

Islamic Response & Linguistic Explanation:

1. The Jussive is Correct Due to Implicit "فـ" (Fa):

   • Classical Arabic allows for implied grammatical particles.

   • Here, the verb نُقَيِّضْ is in the jussive because it is governed by an implied "فـ" (Fa) meaning "so" or "then."

   • The implied structure is:

     "ومن يعش عن ذكر الرحمن فـ نقيّض له شيطاناً..."
     ("And whoever turns away from the remembrance of the Most Merciful, then We assign to him a devil...")

2. Parallel Usage in Classical Arabic:

   • This is a known stylistic feature in classical Arabic poetry and prose.

   • Example from pre-Islamic poetry:

     "تَسْقِيْنَ إِذَا ذَكَرْنَاكِ فَلا تَذْكُرِيْنَا"
     (Here, the verb تَذْكُرِيْنَا is in jussive due to an implied فـ).

3. Quranic Precedent for Implicit Jazm Particles:

   • Similar constructions appear elsewhere in the Quran, such as:

     • Quran 2:102: "وَمَا كَفَرَ سُلَيْمَانُ وَلَٰكِنَّ الشَّيَاطِينَ كَفَرُوا"
       (The verb كَفَرَ is in jussive due to implied negation).

4. Alternative Explanation: Ellipsis of "إن" (Conditional Particle):

   • Some grammarians suggest an implied "إن" (if) before the verb, making it jussive:

     "وَمَن يَعْشُ عَن ذِكْرِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ (إن) نُقَيِّضْ لَهُ شَيْطَانًا..."

Conclusion:

The grammar of Quran 43:36 is not incorrect; rather, it follows classical Arabic rules of implied grammatical particles. The jussive form نُقَيِّضْ is justified by:

• An implied "فـ" (Fa) leading to jazm.

• Possible ellipsis of "إن" (Inna).

• Precedents in classical Arabic literature.

Thus, the claim of a grammatical error is based on a superficial understanding of Arabic syntax, whereas deeper linguistic analysis confirms the verse's correctness