Arabic, The Mother of All Arabic Highlights

Highlights of the talk by Maulana Jahangheer Khan Sahib.

Raise your hands if you are bubbling with excitement. Raise your hands if you are eager for the next conference in august! Why are you waiting? Register NOW!

Advertisements

6 comments

    1. The full video unfortunately is currently unavailable. However, i can direct you towards a website housing some research material for particular languages and their link to arabic. If you have any specific questions you are most welcome to ask and we can try answering them.

      http://www.alislam.org/topics/arabic/

  1. could u elaborate upon the fact that how arabic is the mother of all languages? what about hebrew, it so obviously seems that arabic is derived from hebrew and aramaic and as does linguists agreee upon it. and why do u think that westerners are so biased in regards to such a strong claim if it is so true and obvious. it is a semitic language. central semitic to be precise

  2. Dear Omar

    Thank you for your comment on this post.

    I myself am not very knowledgeable on the topic but a simple listen to the video above answers precisely the questions which you raise. Below is what I understand from the video clip which is a very small part of the excellent talk delivered by Maulana Jahangeer Khan Sahib:

    The first striking thing about Arabic is its complexity. It has something like 200,000 root words, which outnumber any other language including Sanskrit and Hebrew (which in fact borrows upon Arabic to enlighten its root structure). It is generally accepted by philologists that languages devolve from relative complexity to relative simplicity. Thus it stands to reason that Arabic is more archaic than any other language, including Sanskrit and Hebrew.

    The other point is that Arabic seems to share its words (through various formulaic conversions) with more languages than any other single language. Thus it seems that Arabic has lent its parts to all the different languages on the planet throughout history, and through careful study the other languages can in fact be traced back to Arabic.

    For a more comprehensive study, I suggest you follow the excellent link already given in the above post by Muddassar (http://www.alislam.org/topics/arabic/), which lists the work of the Promised Messiah (as) who through divine inspiration drew humanity’s attention towards the remarkable fact that the human civilization, as well has having a common genetic and geographical heritage has a common linguistic heritage as well, and that the elegant structure and perfect system of words possessed by Arabic, points not only towards it being the first, but a revealed language as well. The link then also contains the works by Muhammad Ahmad Mazhar, who following Promised Messiah’s (as) guidance and through painstaking analysis, traced the world languages back to Arabic through various conversion formulae.

    As to your final question about the academic consensus not accepting Arabic as the mother tongue, there are plenty of examples throughout history where the academic consensus has been shattered by a new idea in the field; take the expansion of the universe or the relative nature of time or the ancient urbanisation of the Amazon rainforests etc. I think this is one of those ideas, that is why Jahangeer Sahib draws our attention towards this scholarly field.

    If I may ask in return, why is it so obvious to you that Arabic is derived from Hebrew and Aramaic? Yes Arabic is a Semitic language as you say, but does that prove anything? Its common knowledge that the term Semites (derived from the biblical “Shem”, one of the son’s of prophet Noah (as)) includes Arabs and Hebrews, as well as other peoples due to their common origin. Why does this prove that Arabic is derived from Hebrew and Aramaic?

    All the best
    Naveed

  3. thanks for the reply it did clear up a few things in my mind. btw there is no doubt that arabic is a fascinating language it lends words to quite a few languages no doubt. the earliest aramaic and hebrew texts predate arabic by quite some time. that is my argument. this means it is derived from them

    1. Thank you Omar for your comments and that our humble effort cleared a few things for you.

      Regarding written text, it is true that written texts other than Arabic have been found however, a written word does not mean that the language was not spoken before that time. Sumerian texts were found much before Aramaic and hebrew text. Mayan experts will tell you that the earliest record of written word was in South America 3000 years ago which still exist.

      My points are:

      i) Written text does not tell us when the language originated. It only tells us when it was put in writing. There might be 1000s of years difference between the two.
      ii) Written text also depends on survival of the material on which the text was written.
      iii) Those who study origins of language do not use written language as the source for the origin but look a the spoken language. Written language comes under the history of writing/proto-writing.
      iv) The problem with the whole field is that there are no fossil records of spoken language. Changes in language over recorded time and also their similarity with other languages and sounds are how the experts look at this field.

Discuss

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s