Questions/Comments on the Quran

Surah 1141 After using your rationale express, I hate the authoritative mind controlling force causing state of commotion. Surah 1142 To achieve the control over the state of commotion, requires Surah 1143 The refusal to all types of worship causing state of commotion. Surah 1144 A disposition to state of commotion is a basis for man to become wrongdoer, unjust, corrupt and wicked; the unprofitable idea and imagination which occurs in mind like a disorder, the cause to recede and remain backwards often and repeatedly. Surah 1145 Whoever shall fall for this unprofitable idea and imagination that occurs in mind like a disorder shall return back to the state of commotion. Surah 1146 A manner of acting, like those, bereft of reason, unsound in mind and intellect, as well in the state of commotion.

Surah 102 1 There are multiple competing diversions to turn you away from course, Surah 102 2 Until you rectify the prevalent narrative and tradition into the graves. Surah 102 3 As a matter of fact, you shall be able to know both intuitively and inferentially. Surah 102 4 Again, as a matter of fact, you shall be able to know both intuitively and inferentially. Surah 102 5 As a matter of fact, if you will know the knowledge of certainty. Surah 102 6 Surely, you will see the great advancement. Surah 102 7 Then, surely you will see it as the source of surety and certainty. Surah 102 8 And, most certainly you will be responsible about the life of that era.

Help of researchers is needed. Francis Bacon said Few books need to be chewed and digested. I am not sure if he had mentioned names of some such books that need to be chewed and digested. But the question is whether there exists a book which sustains life because the process of digestion is the Sustainer of life. Yes, one such unique book is available http//haqeeqat.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/008.%20Al%20Anfaal/8.24a.gif You people sincerely respond for Allah the Exalted and for the Messenger when he has urged you people towards that Grand Qur?n which will give you people life . Digestion relates to semantic frame "Ingestion" An Ingestor consumes food or drink (Ingestibles), which entails putting the Ingestibles in the mouth for delivery to the digestive system. This may include the use of an Instrument. The process of digestion involves mechanically breaking down the ingestible into small pieces and then by chemical process converting it into liquid form. What ingestibles are permissible are described by the words stemming from Root . Its primary signification is to open, unlock, unwrap a thing, it denotes to disassemble, unfasten, untie the knot. It is used to dissolve and liquefy some frozen or solid thing. And it may be noted that the best part of the food is that which is liquefied and becomes absorbed into the blood, a liquid. The process is no different when the "ingestible" is the Book. The book can be "digested" only when its text (like digestible) is broken into small pieces and then liquefied by untying the knots of morphology and syntax. And the last step to absorb for making it part and Sustainer of life is to further break each molecule - word into its semantic components the irreducible features of a word. The process of communication is accomplished at Reader's level when he comprehends and perceives the thought the Author intended to convey him. The purpose of the Divine Author is to communicate knowledge which is but guidance and vitality an external source for sustaining life http//haqeeqat.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/016.%20An%20Nahl/016.%20D7.gif http//haqeeqat.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/016.%20An%20Nahl/016.%20D8.gif Realize it; Allah the Exalted brought you people out of the bellies of your respective mothers? In the state that you had no knowledge about physical realm. Matter (Physical realm) has three forms; solid, liquid and gaseous form. The text can be equated to "solid", and the thought embedded - condensed in it has the analogy with gas. Untying the knots - bonds of solid liquefies it and liquid can be turned into gaseous form by further breaking the ties. Another analogy of translating and interpreting a foreign language text strictly according to academic rules and principles is the translation process of protein encoding genes in human genome. The genes are like sentences and its codons are like grammatical units of the sentence. Segmenting the text into grammatical units is the first step for comprehending and understanding Grand Qur?n. It is like chewing, breaking the ingestible; like untying the knots of solid to make it in liquid form, and like identifying codons in the protein encoding gene which yields protein, a life sustaining object. I have started work on this project. Help is needed as there are many critical readers of Qur'aan on the forum. http//haqeeqat.pk/GrammaticalUnits.htm

Peace all, Could someone explain 132 please. I am more interested in that part of the verse " "He established Himself on the Throne Thanks

Peace. I was wandering what do others on this forum believe about angels.And in case you believe in spirit guides, how would they operate? Thanks

I changed meanings of Allah from "One who is not a deity for worship" to "One who doesn't engage in worship" based upon improved understanding of language principles. This would have made translation of this phrase even more incomprehensible. Today just by chance I stumble on its explanation. There can?t be an absolute refusal of all types of submission, unless one doesn?t engage in worship. is from root and its wazan is . Now try understanding the meanings of based upon language formula ?Meaning of root + Meaning of Wazan?. Meaning of root ?he worshiped or adored? Meaning of wazan is "Refusal or flight". Now by putting this knowledge together we get above meanings of the phrase.

Salaam brothers and sisters I am trying to understand the meanings of 4333-35 (&#65279 (&#65279 ( SAHIH INTERNATIONAL And if it were not that the people would become one community , We would have made for those who disbelieve in the Most Merciful - for their houses - ceilings and stairways of silver upon which to mount And for their houses - doors and couches upon which to recline And gold ornament. But all that is not but the enjoyment of worldly life. And the Hereafter with your Lord is for the righteous. The red part in this translation is extra and is not in original Arabic text but it totally changes the meanings. It would be appreciated if you could give your understanding of these ayat. Regards

Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu , I am Hafiz Mohammad a missionary/investor.we conducted an event called Meet your Muslim neighbor where we volunteers invite Muslims and Non Muslims from the street give them gifts, English translation of Quran and free food and engage with them;talk about the basics of Islam and clear their misconceptions about Islam.we are donating gifts and English translation of Quran to any Islamic organization or an individual that will spread and promote Islam in his/her country.Please if you are interested in this missionary work,kindly reply me via my private email [email protected] to enable us discuss in detail

Alzheimer's is not a disease but is portrayed as phenomenon in Qur'aan https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNMHHFZJX-I

Malaika Listen To Reason and SJD to Al Insan

Alatheena kafaroo = those bent on ignorance; those lost in darkness (26-7, 986) - this includes people with cognitive dissonance when it comes to iman (trust/security in God's existence). Includes religious people. Al kafiroon/kafireen = the hypocrites; those who spurn guidance while claiming virtue (28-20; 234; 4161, 544, 517, 572-73). This isnt just any "disbeliever." Those who ascribe to a so-called monotheistic religion hypocritically and similar people are in this category. They outwardly claim to have iman (trust/security in God's existence) but they actually do not. They deceive and make a joke out of God's law/guidance. Examples church leaders, sultans, kings, "ayatollahs," "sayyids" - and those who work with/for them - who use religion to take advantage of others. Iblees is in this categor, while he clearly believes in God. Kuffar = atheists; rejecters; ingrates (2109, 557; 1342, 4734, 5440-43) See how 1342-43 and 4734 distinguises between kuffar and alatheena kafaroo The root KFR comes from a farmer/tiller because they throw seeds in the dirt and cover them. Also signifies darkness, concealing, hypocrisy, ingratitude and disacknowledgement. Al munafiqoon = the waverers; the sell-outs; no conviction and change sides quickly, yet not a leader and not as deceptive as the hypocrites (3167, 849, 4142). These people want the benefits of the community of believers but dont want to sacrifice because they do not have iman (trust/security in God's existence). They jump ship easily and thus are a threat and an anchor. The root NFQ comes from creeping from one hole to another and also signifies to spend and be saleable. It is also the root for infaq, which means donation/distribution/spending on others.

Quran and DNA have same translation system; interesting similarities

Exodus of Bani Iesraa'eel- the sons of Iesraa'eel alai'his'slaam from Egypt to Peninsula of Sinai is one of the most discussed events of the history of Jews which is rendered blurred by conjectural, hypothetical and imaginative stories. However, the Grand Qur'aan has described the event in such picturesque manner that we can watch it as if we are watching its footage recorded by a camera. Exodus from Egypt-Eye witness account

Word ESMA' (&#1569, usually rendered as "names", is a plural form of a noun SEMIYY (&#1617, which was used twice in the Qur'an, in ayets 197 and 1965.

KAANE is form III verb and in form I it has only KAAF as its root. Its meaning is "it/he happened". When used in form III (ie. kaane) its meaning is "it/he happened towards something/somebody" and when it's used in dual/plural form it can mean "they happened between themselves" or similar. QAALE is form III verb also and in this form it means "he said to somebody". When it's used in dual/plural it can mean "they told between themselves" or "they told together" or similar.

'Asher is a group. All numbers are 1, 2, 9, 2 for 11, 12, 19, 20, and they are a number of groups a single, 1 group of kewakib 2 nations and states of Beni Israil Judea and Israil 2 groups of moon phases from full to new moon, and backwards 9 groups of melaiket, guardians of Jeheem 2 groups of mu'minoon, etc. Part of ayet which is understood as "4 months and 10 days" is "4 occurancies and together". It is not about widows, it's about women left in bed by their husbands. After 4 such cases, while they're still with husbands, they're free to do whatever they want (ie. to divorce) and husbands cannot stop (junaah) it. All ayets with 'asher and e?hur are misunderstood by most of the people.

Can anyone explain this chapter please verse by verse. Thank you brothers n sisters

Someone asked, what is the meanings of ? Traditionally, the Miim-e-Mushdad at the end is regarded as a Vocative particle for calling out meaning "O Allah" or "Ah Allah". This phrase is used 5 times in Quran. Based upon this explanation the traditionalists have created numerous prayers to call upon Allah and are commonly recited before and after Namaz and in congregations. However, a language rule says that that Miim-e-Mushdad is actually written as an abbreviation for word "Ummun", commonly meaning and use word for mother. However, conceptually this word means "source, origin or foundation". 3946 I compel myself to reason and then express that one who doesn?t worship is an original foundation for all the knowledge having firm basis in reality as well disposition to do good. A knower of that which is hidden from senses as well the perceptible. You withhold yourself from acting in corrupt manner as it separates from your bondsmen-ship. It is what you need to continue doing for existence by following one another.

Peace all peace As I expressed before my reluctance to understand ?ma? as a relative pronoun for animated beings, let me explain first that my reluctance is about the use of ?ma? as a relative specifically for human beings. Also I'd like to add it all is the result of my flaw, ignorance and limitations so please don't understand my words as an attempt to critize anything but as an attempt to expound my doubts and to understand and clarify them peace May the Lord enlighten me if I am wrong or just ignorant pr Being aware of the different meanings/ nuances of ?ma? Interrogative (what?) Relative (what / whatever / which) Negative particle (not) Adverbial (?as long as? Gerundival some others My misunderstanding or incapacity to understand clearly concerns the use of ?ma? as relative being used specifically for the reference to human beings. As ?what? in English and reading Quran, I can see that ?ma? can be relative also for animated beings such as animals or babies, but it is not used as such in the case of grown up (let's say) human beings (with the exception of the occurrences I will quote later). For example 222 The moment every nursing mother will leave what ('amma) she was nursing FM The moment every nursing mother will leave her suckling child. In this case ?ma? is clearly referring to animated, but maybe because it is about a child (non developed sexually / still asexual human being). This happens in many languages babies/ very young children or animals are addressed by ?it? (thus the relative ?what?) in English, for example... In the case of this verse, in fact, it would be better to translate literally ?what she is nursing? and not ?whom she is nursing?. There is not problem admiting that ?ma? here is ?what? and not ?who?. (There is another example in Quran where ?ma? is used in reference to a fetus it is talking about ?what? Maryam had in her belly (Jesus), but I can't find it right now. ?Ma? is also used in 737 and 1673, for example, referring worshiped besides Allah idols 1673 And they serve others besides Allah what (ma) not possess for them provision from the heavens and the earth any 737 Where what (ma) you used to call from besides Allah? In both cases it is talking about false gods / idols and therefore about de facto non existing beings, that is why, imo, ?ma? is used here and not . Again no problem translating it into ?what? in English. Also ?ma? is used with the meaning of ?whatever/ everything? and thus in those cases it includes BY EXTENSION, also human beings. But it is always BY EXTENSION and never exclusively for human beings. Just an example 324 And Allah is the one who created the heavens and the earth and whatever / what (ma) is between them... In any of the above cases we find problems understanding and translating ?ma? as ?what? or ?whatever?, but it can't be translated as ?whom? because, in any case, ?ma? seems not to be exclusive for human beings (these are included just by extension). Quran uses and for those cases in so many examples through Quran. The only cases where ?ma? can be understood as strictly and exclusively as ?who? and not as ?whatever? are maybe the following 2 66 So We made it an example for what (lima) in front of them (the present) and what (wama) after them (future) and a reminder for the muttaqina who fear Allah. FM So it was that We made it as a restraint for what had happened in it and also what had passed, and a reminder to the righteous. I quote this verse because I have seen translations of ?lima? and ?wama? as ?for whom?, I guess a an attempt to relate them to the muttaqina later in the verse. But the interpretation could be perfectly regarding past and future or facts, so there is not a general rule nor a clear example to deduce here about ?ma? being related to human beings. 6133 And He could bring from after you what (ma) He pleases just as (kama) He established you from the seed of a people other. It is one of the few cases where ?ma? can be interpreted as regarding men and women. In any case, although, precisely here we can understand an adverbial ?ma? ?And He could bring from after you (as long as He pleases) just as He established you from the seed of another people?. Also again we can understand ?ma? here as ?whatever? God can make trees as succesors of human being on earth if He pleases, can't He? The only reason that ?ma? could be ?whom? is because of the word ?people? (qawmin) used later. In any case, it is not clear, exclusive or strictly the use of ?ma? as ?whom? in this case, although it is the closest. And then... the guest stars ma malakat aymanakum (MMA) and other cases of ?ma? where resides the core or pith of my ?personal issue? taking ?ma? exclusively as ?whom? 2236 No sin upon you if you divorce the women what (ma) not (lam) you have had sexual intercourse with them (hunna) or not / nor you have set for them (lahunna) a dowry. Since ?ma? can't be negation here because ?lam? comes right after it to negate, we can only interpret that ?ma? is ?whom?, and it is referring to women. Actually the use of ?hunna? and ?lahunna? later in the verse seems to verify it. But, again, why ?ma? and not or ? In the 99% of the cases as relative, ?ma? is ?what?, and then only in 3 cases it is ?whom?, precisely in occurrences where it refers to women confused Ok, I will admit, this case can be understood as ?as long as? (adverbial ?ma?). 422 And do not marry what (?ma?) married your fathers from the women except what (ma) has already be done. Now, the adverbial ?ma? can't be used for the interpretation of the first ?ma? because, simply, it does not make very much sense with the ?from the women? And do not marry as long as your fathers married from the women...? (?). Obviously there is something missing as a pronoun attached to the verb or something confused So for the first time we have a relative ?ma? which cant be understood as any other kind of ?ma?, and it is ONLY for human beings, and it is only about..... women confused 43 This is my favorite yay And if you fear that you won't deal justly regarding the orphans, then marry (off) what (?ma?) is agreeable to you of the women Again a ?ma? interpreted as ?who? for women although it could be the adverbial (?as long as?) ?ma?. But as in 422, there is some kind of difficulty in its interpretation as adverbial taking into account there is a ?from the women? later in the verse. Why ?from the women? and not simply ?the women? being the subject? I feel we are forcing ?ma? to be regarding the women while the truth is that it is not referring to them necessary, it could be in reference to many other things, there is not an attached pronoun anywhere specifying the genre of the subject or object of "taba" so that we interpret unmistakably that "ma" is "women". 424 And the emancipated ones from the women except what (ma) committed (by) your oath. 3350 O prophet, We have made lawful for you the wives to whom ( ) you have already given their dowries, and the one (&#1575 committed to by your oath, as ( ) granted to you by God (I have a question here why " " for the wives and then for the one committed to the prophet by his oath? confused Why this MMA expression always has "ma" and never specifies with attached pronouns who or what is MMA? confused 3352 Except what (ma) commited (by) your oath. The famous MMA... Maybe It is my neglicence, ignorance or limitation but I cant fit together the adverbial ?ma? after the ?except? ?Except as long as commited (by) your oath?? (?) Even if we take into account the meaning of ma as ?as long as?... there is not object! Something is missing. I mean, literally the verse says ?except as long as commited (by) your oath?... who is commited by the oath? Literally there is not an "they are committed by your oath" anywhere.... We are supposing it. We are just interpreting / supposing they are the women, but in fact there is nothing stating it except if we are considering ?ma? meaning ?who? here while in the 99% of the cases ?ma? means ?what?. It suddenly became ?who? regarding women here confused Why do we suppose this ?ma? are the women? Can't it be something else since the verb ?malakat? has not attached object pronoun specifying it? Because in other cases there is an attached pronoun later specifiying (if you understand ?ma? as ?who?) what ?ma? is referring to 2433 And those who seek the writing / consumate (the marriage) from what ( ) commited (by) your oath, give them ( ) the writing / document it with them if you know in them ( ) any good. (It is the only case since I know where ?ma? is de facto specified as being also for males). why we never see "malakat aymanukum" with "alladi" or "man"? 2236 No sin upon you if you divorce the women what (ma) not (lam) you have had sexual intercourse with them (hunna) or not / nor you have set for them (lahunna) a dowry. So, why the ambiguity with no attached pronoun in 424, 3352 and 3350? That is why my understanding of ?ma? in 424, 3352 and 3350 is not ?whom? but ?whatever?. Something like ?with the exception of WHAT / WHATEVER your oath emcompasses?. This ?whatever? could include an oath for cellibate, for example, or a wide range of some other things or in any case something i am not able to interpret. I feel we are forcing ?ma? to mean ?whom? in MMA while it is ONLY in MMA where we find clearly ?ma? meaning ?whom?, but it means ?who? just because we suppose it refers to people. The truth is that there is nothing in the verse veryfying it is about human beings (except maybe in 2433), there is not attached pronoun as I said. It literally says ?except what committs / possess your oath?. Why is it people? Why this "who" is exclusively "who" in MMA while in thousands of other examples it is "what"? Not that my understanding is good and fits everywhere, of course not and you can see it just by one glance, but this is the only thing I could come up with until now while all I have about "ma" here and the other cases is only a lot of doubts dressed with tones of ignorance '( To sum up, ?ma? can be interpreted as ?who? and only ?who? (not as also adverbial "ma" or a "whatever" including by extension human beings) when it is in reference to women in 424, 3352, 3350, 43 and 422 and only also about men in 2433. All the other examples can be interpreted / understood otherwise or translated into English with no issues as ?what?. (Excuse me if I missed any other quote about "ma" concerning exclisuvely "who&quot. So maybe, just maybe, we are forcing the interpretation of ?ma? as ?whom? in those cases, when we know arabic has other relatives for human beings ( and ) and ?ma? is ?what? in the 99% of its occurrrences as relative. Also to relate it to human beings, we are adding pronouns that actually they are not in the text (except in 2 cases as I expounded). But then, I give up hypno I dunno and I ask for your enlighten.... 915 FM And the heaven and what (ma) He built it. Y. Ali And the heaven and He who built it If "ma" is "who" it is in reference to Allah? If "ma" is what... what is it refering to? If "ma" is "heaven"... why the "ha" later on the verb? Or precisely "ha" is there because "ma" has no genre? And then why "ha" is required here and not in MMA? confused Also 916 FM And the earth and what (ma) He sustains it (ha) Y. Ali And the earth and He who (ma) made it (ha) 917 FM And a sould and what (ma) He made it (ha) Y. Ali And a sould and He who (ma) made it (ha) Maybe things are just easier than I think, muuuuuuuuuuch simplier, but I still feel we are forcing ?ma? to mean ?who? in many verses when we actually do not have proofs from the text affirming it is ?who?. In the 99% of the cases this ?ma? is not ?who? but ?what?, but then (and what a coincidence always regarding MMA or women) it becomes exclusively "who" confused Are we forcing interpretations? Are we missing something? Am I thinking too much and making things more complicated than they are? Did I miss the all clarifying quote? May the Lord enlighten us, He knows best hail Have a great day and thak you once again for your time and patience sun

As traditional Muslims, we all have grown up with a concept of word Jinn. Here is an improved linguistic based translation of Sura Jinn. Can someone guess who might be the real Jinns? 721 Use reason and then make it manifest by hastening towards understanding mode of conduct, that those who lacked reason were frightened of and took flight, saying certainly we have heard a strange collection of substantive principles. 722 It is a mode of conduct towards the right direction for beliefs; therefore, with it we can become safe and secure and never ever shall we take copartner anyone with our foundation (inherent power/Rabb). 723 And with this substantive mode of conduct, you shall be elevated and dignified in majesty by our foundation (inherent power). This should be sought after, instead of any innovation. 724 And this mode of conduct, according to reasoned expression of rapidly produced thoughtless in midst of us, is a total transgression of limits, regarding one who doesn?t worship. 725 And for sure, editorial consensus thought that you should never think and express a lie; either in the heedless negligence or due to lack of the reason, regarding one who doesn?t worship. 726 And this mode of conduct (reasoning) would help seekers of protection to navigate through this journey of heedless negligence and lack of reason. Hence, provisions for their journey against inequitable and tyrannical conduct. 727 And that they would know by considering like you did, never ever even once, one who doesn?t worship has restrained anyone?s free will. 728 And that editorial consensus would like to touch on, for sake of knowledge, by experiencing it to be satisfied; preserved soundly and ready to overcome darkness of ignorance. 729 And that editorial peers used to have heated argument about it (modes of conduct) for the understanding, thus whoever seeks understanding, seeking and searching is the distinguished quality; it is like a guiding star on a roadway. 7210 And the editorial peers have no knowledge as which moral and physical wrong doing has turned the inhabitants of planet earth from their purpose and brought them into a state of commotion. However, their inherent foundation is the way of truth to follow with self-constraining firmness in doing so. 7211 And that editorial peers among us are the virtuous as well, the dreadful, these are parties of editorial peers differing in their desires. 7212 And that editorial peers, understood that they would never go backwards about totality of one who doesn?t worship; never ever on the planet earth shall they go backwards or flee from totality. 7213 And that editorial peers after perceiving the right mode of conduct, made themselves safe and secure with it. Consequently, whoever secures and safeguards with his inherent foundation. He shall neither fear any deficiency in mode of conduct, nor of having an inequitable and tyrannical conduct. 7214 And there are editorial peers among us acting as free of vice and acting equitably all the time. Then, those of you who become vice free have repaired towards right course. 7215 And as far as those acting inequitably, it shall drive them into human sacrificial valley as its fuel. 7216 And those if they had persisted upon the mode of conduct surely editorial peers would have irrigated them from source of water. 7217 And editorial peers shall put them into arbitration, there in, to separate good (balanced) from bad (excessive). As to who stood against and prevented from remembrance of their inherent foundation. It is an uphill road to ascend. 7218 And that the acts of prostrations for one who doesn?t worship will not promise anyone of you to be with one who doesn?t worship. 7219 And this substantive mode of conduct as long it remains established as the surety by signed and witnessed bond to one who doesn?t worship. They shall be able to find or discover by the searching or questioning it. They shall also be able to come closer for considering and adopting it. 7220 Reason potential actions and then make manifest, that certainly neither will I seek and nor will I be taking co-partner anyone with my inherent foundation. 7221 Reason possible action and then make manifest, indeed neither I possesses power to harm, nor to make you walk upon a straight. 7222 Reason possible action and then manifest, I shall never ever, once deviate from the right course regarding one who doesn?t worship and nor, I shall never ever be found as relinquisher of right course or as dreadful. 7223 Besides attaining the utmost point towards which one directs his course to attain the state that is intended by one who doesn?t worship and ones communications. Whoever rebelled against one who doesn?t worship and one?s communication? Therefore, certainly for him is a fire of human sacrificial valley, abiding in it perpetually. 7224 Until when they see that good promise for those who make themselves vice free, only then they will know who is a weaker helper and are more numbered in persistent error. 7225 Reason possible action and then make manifest, as I understand more closely, I come to what you promise or to that which my foundation bought me into being for whole life time. 7226 The discipline of knowledge unperceived by senses shall not be revealed for anyone from its imperceptions 7227 Except who is pleased with communication, otherwise in order to understand the mode of conduct, pursue it, based upon evidence and consolidate it, as well as follow it watchfully. 7228 Indeed for the sake of knowledge that really can lead to utmost point, which is intended for repair of affairs are communications of their inherent foundation. These are for safe guarding and to have sound understanding of all things considered as beings.