Questions/Comments on the Quran

I believe the word in question is in the passive form, i.e. the action expressed in the verb is received by the object, so yes, Abdel Haleem seems right.

My understanding is this "harassment" was physical and to avoid that you need "physical" presence to be safe. Couldnt decode it. From parenthetic Connect it back to 3348

Salam, Iwent through the article. The so-called 1st pillar of Islam does not exist in The Quran. This statement may also be misleading. For everything there has to be an initial point, to begin with. And so for Islam also there is a beginning, which was emphasised by all the Messengers in time and space.

Dear Herbman, thanks for a reasonable and rationale answer again. If Alkitab, is really a book for eternal guidance; how could it describe an event fixed in time? What are the implications for present time or times to come? However, interpreting Alkitab this way does seem to benefit, ones doing it. In addition, interpreting this Sura in traditional way does seem to benefit ones doing it; this by implying them to be as esteemed or only ones having direct communication with Rubb; to a degree, that Rubb chose divine interventions suspending normal laws of Universe to save them. Brother this book is indeed easy to understand for anybody and everybody. Is there anyone wanting too, should be the question Badar

For hikma, i would start with 1240 Following any hukm other than allah is shrik. Excellent verse for ibada/shirk, btw. Ha-Kaf-Miim = To restrain from, exercise authority, command, give judgment, judge, be wise. To restrain/prevent/withhold a person from acting in an evil or corrupt manner, to judge or give judgement, pass sentence, decide judicially, exercise judicial authority/jurisdiction/rule/dominion/government, order or ordain or decree a thing, to be wise, to be sound in judgement, possess knowledge or science and wisdom, render a thing firm/stable/sound/free from defect or imperfection by the exercise of skill. hakama vb. (1) perf. act. 458, 542, 4048 impf. act. 2113, 2213, 323, 355, 458, 4105, 4141, 51, 544, 544, 545, 547, 547, 595, 6136, 787, 1035, 10109, 1280, 1341, 1659, 16124, 2178, 2256, 2269, 2448, 2451, 294, 37154, 393, 3946, 4521, 6010, 6836, 6839 impv. 542, 542, 548, 549, 21112, 3822, 3826 n.vb. 379, 543, 550, 550, 657, 662, 689, 1222, 1240, 1267, 1337, 1341, 1826, 1912, 2174, 2179, 2621, 2683, 2778, 2814, 2870, 2888, 4012, 4210, 4516, 5248, 6010, 6848, 7624 pcple. act. 2188, 787, 10109, 1145, 1280, 958 ahkam n.m. 1145, 958 hakam n.m. 435, 435, 6114 hakim n.m. 232, 2129, 2209, 2220, 2228, 2240, 2260, 36, 318, 358, 362, 3126, 411, 417, 424, 426, 456, 492, 4104, 4111, 4130, 4158, 4165, 4170, 538, 5118, 618, 673, 683, 6128, 6139, 810, 849, 863, 867, 871, 915, 928, 940, 960, 971, 997, 9106, 9110, 101, 111, 126, 1283, 12100, 144, 1525, 1660, 2252, 2410, 2418, 2458, 2459, 276, 279, 2926, 2942, 3027, 312, 319, 3127, 331, 341, 3427, 352, 362, 391, 408, 4142, 423, 4251, 434, 4384, 444, 452, 4537, 462, 484, 487, 4819, 498, 5130, 571, 591, 5924, 605, 6010, 611, 621, 623, 6418, 662, 7630 hikmah n.f. 2129, 2151, 2231, 2251, 2269, 2269, 348, 381, 3164, 454, 4113, 5110, 16125, 1739, 3112, 3334, 3820, 4363, 545, 622 hakkama vb. (2) impf. act. 465, 543 ahkama vb. (4) impf. act. 2252 perf. pass. 111 pcple. pass. 37, 4720 tahakama vb. (6) impf. act. 460 Lane's Lexicon, Volume 2, page 252, 253, 254 http//www.studyquran.co.uk/PRLonline.htm

Peace, Respectfully. Thank you and may God bless you. I apologize if i have opened a topic already in existance. Been having some trouble with computers here.....sorry. God bless you. Peace.

Salaam, I'm certain if you did fast you would remain in the same state of comprehension.

Peace, 4824] He is the One who withheld their hands of aggression against you, and withheld your hands of aggression against them in the mids of Mecca, after He had granted you victory over them. GOD is Seer of everything you do. It is they who disbelieved and barred you from the Sacred Masjid, and even prevented your offerings from reaching their destination. There were believing men and women (within the enemy camp) whom you did not know, and you were about to hurt them, unknowingly. GOD thus admits into His mercy whomever He wills. If they persist, He will requite those among them who disbelieve with a painful retribution. My understanding of Mekkah would be better translated with the word "chaos" instead of "destruction". Then the "context" is explained by itself, in the middle of chaos God withheld their hands from yours because you were about to hurt innocents. regards

Dear all, just to clearify for ones who are wondering about this issue of proper noun. In classic Arabic there are only three kind of words. Nouns, verbs and particles. There is no seperate class of proper nouns. Proper nouns morphology follows the same structural rules as described above in my post. Badar

You know when i read these comments,thoughts about this and that,i CLEARLY see how different sects came to be. ! Everyone had a different opinion and im not saying thats a bad thing,but later the opinion became a statement,the statement turned into a law,the law became GODs law pr and BOOM hail a SECT was born. " welcome,Welcome to 2009,we have plenty of sects for EVERYONE,pick and choose between what you like and dislike. handshake" No wonder that there is so much chaos in the muslim world today,not because of their agreement's and disagreement's,we should discuss and exchange knowledge and wisdom. BUT!,when that agreement or disagreement turns into "my opinion,your opinion,NO,its his law,hers law and then into GOD's LAW"we slowly but surely miss the whole point of islam and our selfish desires overcomes our main purpose in life. I know its completely offtopic but thats just,MY OPINION ! ignore Peace to all peace

Respected and Dear Sister Samia, are you aware that in Classic Arabic, alphabet could be changed to in script? Badar

Enough of circumcision. Pubic hair and plucking or shaving. What does the quran say? The Quran doesn't seem to say anything specific beyond not 'corrupting' God's creation. I think a better question would be, 'what kinds of acts and changes would be considered 'corruption' of God's creation?'

Peace Mozmahe, You said "So it is in the language of the city dwellers and not the nomads." I gather from your article that the great reading is written in the Nabatean Aramaic script, but the language is Arabic. From the above, you are saying that the nomads and city dwellers spoke different languages, and, if that is so what are the different languages? Not different languages but different dialects that were mutually comprehensible. This would be like the typical Arabic-speaking Middle Eastern country today, there were two main vernacular dialects spoken by the common folk. One dialect was spoken in the rural areas (ANA dialects such as Safaitic) and the other (Arabic) was spoken in the towns. The two dialects were largely mutually comprehensible despite their variances. This is much like say the Egyptian Cairienne dialect spoken by city dwellers and Egyptian Sinai dialect spoken by the nomads are mutually comprehensible. Like those modern day dialects, the dialects of the nomads would have been seen as a more ?rough? dialect than the Old Arabic city dialect. One can see some evidence of this ?roughness?, for example, in the Safaitic definite article (h-) having a demonstrative connotation while this is largely subdued in the Arabic definite article. This would also resolve another paradox. Why do we find thousands of ANA and Safaitic inscriptions in the deserts of Arabia left by the nomads but very few Old Arabic inscriptions? When the common people in towns needed to write something, they had access to scribes who could write it in the language of prestige. This is why Old Arabic inscriptions are rare. On the rare occasions when Old Arabic was written, the script of the language of prestige that the scribes of that region were using was used to write it. When the nomads in the desert needed to write something, it didn?t serve any practical purpose but was done as a form of entertainment to kill time during the long hours of solitary nomadic life. This is why the nomads despite being illiterate scribbled thousands of graffiti in the desert of Northern Arabia. Because the purpose was entertainment and had nothing to do with literacy, they used their oral language. Also, since they didn?t have access to scribes, they used the simplest script that required no adjustments or knowledge of writing standards to represent foreign letters. Prestige was not a factor so they naturally used the Arabian Musnad script which had the 28 letters of Arabic represented. All this and more can be deduced based on the single important observation from the great reading that Jack made. As far as I know, no one has ever considered that the people of the prophet (and thus their language) was from the city and not the desert when forming theories on Classical Arabic. This holds the key to resolving many paradoxes that have challenged researchers for a long time. Peace, Ayman

Points to ponder Do we really think that we have it all correct and there is no problem at all, understanding the verses of our Creator without any doubt? Have we not made QurAan totally dependent on stories, history, narrations of traditions, right or wrong, and claim that the text of the book cannot be understood , till we are well versed in all of the above. Does it mean that God has done a less than ideal work for us to understand the real message? Should we not think, then logically, that when the message of QurAan, was being transcribed by the scribes, in the prevalent writing technique of that time, they must have been following a set of rules of writing, prevalent at that time, to avoid confusion. These rules have later become to be known as rules of grammar of the classical arabic and the lexical rules of the classic, old arabic. This fact is true for all present as well as arciveve languages which ever existed or exist in the world. Do we have these rules well preserved in Arabic and subsequently translated by other scholars in other languages? Of note are the marvelous translation work of these rules with great authors like William Wright and Edward Lanes. These books are not their own mind creations, but only a great piece of translation of these rules, written by great Arabic scholars from long time ago, done then to preserve the original meaning, as language was changing at the most rapid rate ever witnessed by any other language because of a very fast spread of the message across the globe, where the language was not even known. Has anyone ever attempted to apply these rules in the understanding of the literal meaning of the words while attempting to translate this great message? If this was done correctly, I believe that Gods message would not be dependent on later written history books and books of traditions in order for it to be understood. I have seen on this forum, a recent attempt by few brothers and sisters to bring our attention to this very fundamental principle of at least looking at all the words, letters and signs used in the QurAan, to atleast see, if it makes a logical sense and to see, if we can understand the Book without the aid of the history and tradition books. If all words are explainable using the understanding of of these grammar and lexical rules, as explained in these scolarly works, then why do we resist so much even considering it? I have looked at many of these words, based on the principles of Gezm, teshdeed, Feth, kesra, dumma, consonant, particles and other rules, as first introduced to me on this forum, as holding true, each time I have tried to verify them from these online available books. These are not only verifiable by those books, but the meaning each time I see, becomes exremely magnanomous. I understand that magnanimity is not the only criteria, but if it holds all gounds of the principles of grammar and lexicology and becomes more profound as well, then what are the chances, that this may be the only way to correct our understanding? I dont think that we should be ashamed at accepting a fact, if it turns out to be true. To derclare this methodolgy at making an honest attemt, at the least, at understanding the message, as satanic and halucination, without making a full attempt of atleast looking at it in an unbiased manner, is probably not the best way especially if we believe that there is still room to understand the message better. We cannot make any change in any thing in the QurAan but we can atleast ty to verify and exhaust all the resource to make sure that we are not making any mistake in understanding the word of God. If we had it understood it all correct, we would not have been in this pathetic state in the league of nations, but would have been leading it, as we once did before. By calling it wrong or satanic, by jusy doubting the sincerity and without proving it by solid reasoning, as wrong, dont we stand a chance of actually calling QurAanic verses as wrong, if those may turn out to be the actual meanings? We as humans, have a tendency to stick to the traditions of our forefathers, and believing in the correctness of our own set of belief systems. It is this barrier which was broken by the companions of the Prophet(S) and by all those who have had any positive impact on the society or in any dicipline of scientific growth. This is the truth, wether we like it or not. Can we not look at people without contempt and doubt their sincererity from the very outset, as he or she may be saying the truth. This is the way of the progreesive nations and was the way of the Prophets as well, otherwise we would all be stuck with no positive change in this society ever. Anyone can be right, unless proven not to be. This takes a process of honest verification by others as well, once any theory is presented. We see this to be the method in all diciplines. The verification process by other students, either proves or disproves the theory, but they all have to have valid ground to support or disprove any theory. Calling it just wrong does not make it wrong. No body in the modern world call people name, but prove them right or wrong by using solid arguements, with a willingness to give up their understanding if they later find themselves to be the erring party. This is true in all diciplins of education and logic. QurAan after all, is the biggest source of education for the entire humanity. May God keep our hearts unsealed, our ears and eyes open, as He Himsellf tells us that in order for us to comprehend the knowledge, we need to keep it unsealed and open, in a manner that we can differntiate between good and bad and right and wrong without making mistakes if possible. If we dont do that we stand a chance of insisting on our mistakes to be right. I am not suggesting as to who is right or who is wrong, but I only request and pray to use this as the guiding prnciple before accepting or rejecting anything in any matter. We will save ourelves a lot of hearaches that way. Peace to all.

How long we would remain S. students on the this forum by not respectfully responding to the teacher, "yes, Mam". We must learn on the forum to submit to the seasoned and reasoned response and explanation, instead of sticking and keeping the shackle around our necks.

Hey what about this verse here Walabithoo fee kahfihim thalathami-atin sineena waizdadoo tisAAan So they stayed in their Cave three hundred years, and (some) add nine (more) sinin is used for "three hundred" ? hmm.. im not sure about that. i just say sana in everyday modern arabic which isnt always gramatically correct

If you really want to learn GOD's message stay away from QXP. why? what's wrong with it? who's to say YOU use the perfect translation. but actually, we CAN'T understand it as 'God not knowing it', because it would then contradict rest of quran. just like we can't understand 'kill them wherever you find them' as some excuse to kill nonbelievers, because it goes against other parts of quran. This is just like saying can God be unfair? When we think of God as "someone" who can and can't. We do not, and cannot, know what God is So let's just think of what His attributes are... exactly. now i KNOW that God knows everything, incliuding the future, although it doesn't mean HE brought those decisions. we just have to know what God is and how He is and/or operates. how i see it is, we make the future with our thoughts and intentions (for example, you may think of going somewhere tomorrow and when you decide that you almost already did it) but since we're not alone here, there's other people involved, their intentions get in the way, and there's lets say 5 different possibilities and the one most likely to happen stays... it's kinda mathmatical. and since God invented the system... of course He will be aware of it... will know all possibilities and see which one has most potential.

I removed your "loud" post because double posting is not permitted. No need to shout. If you calmly re-read my post, you will probably understand what I am saying. You are talking of "the book", I am talking of "al kitaab" which is not necessarily translated to "the book". What's the difference between them?

Salam, AbdunNUR, i didnt want to catch u on somethin, be cool, brother. I realy want to know your understanding on several issues. Please, answer my 1st question.

Earlier an opposite of it are persons 4137 There is nothing embarrassing/contracting for those who have accepted/believed and acted righteously as to what they had eaten and drank earlier when they returned repenting and believed and did righteous acts; afterwards they mindfully restrained and accepted then afterwards remained cautious and heedful avoiding unrestrained conduct and they behaved moderately and generously.