Im actually considering "Aidid Safar's" Quran translation as it makes most sense
-
Peace all,
Im sick and tired of sectarians having hijacked the terms in the Quran. All this hajj being in some place called Makkah. Bakkah being the old name of Makkah or another physical place for that matter. Tradtional five time salat. 2.5% zakat and ramadan being a month of the Islamic calendar. All these things dont make much sense to me any more. Why dont we consider Aidid Safar's translation for a change. That seems to make a lot more sense
http//aididsafar.com/translation.html
When i first read it i thought like many that it was just mere speculation but something in those translations caught me. It all seemed so rational and logical and the roots of the terms do carry those meanings. Have a look at them. GOD Bless! -
Peace JK
Do you know if Aidid safar has completed his Translation of The Quran yet ? So far it's still stuck on 319 , I have been waiting for him to complete his work on it so those of us who like his Translation can purchase it . For me and other God Alone/Quran only Brethren here , Aidid's Translation is the Best yet . Hopefully , it will be available soon .
Peace
almarh0m
-
Peace,
Rashad has brought a great change inte world and he gave the correct translation of many verses which sunnis/shias and even other quran alone Muslims like the Pervezis left untackled BUT it was STILL INCOMPLETE. Now we have Aidid Safar who tackles another huge mistranslated part of the Quran and we also have bro Arnold with Dr. Shabbir's QXP, the 3rd edition of which is coming out soon. That maybe good also. GOD Bless! -
The most logical interpretation asyet
-
If you don't count the errors/problems that is
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=7402.0
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=14970.0I agree with
Peace Jonny, all,
For me, cross-referencing between the many translations as well as root searching has worked best. I try not to get too enamoured with any one translator because they're all human and carry their own biases.
Peace,
TayUse www.studyquran.org for example.
-
Salaam,
I just knew about him today sigh
I just read some of his articles. They bring smile ) to my sad face ;D
Regards,
Yuliana -
Where is his translation?
Noted he had only translated two chapters, i.e. 1 & 2 in his site.
http//aididsafar.com/translation.htmlRead the 'Sol-laa Shuffle' here and it is very interesting;
https//mentalbondageinthenameofgod.wordpress.com/
https//mentalbondageinthenameofgod.wordpress.com/2009/01/04/the-sol-laa-shuffle/
https//mentalbondageinthenameofgod.wordpress.com/2009/01/03/sol-laa-commitments-is-not-ritual-prayer/ -
salam jonny,
i have read his translation just now its nice specially how he translated verse which considered as polygamy permission. he said verse 43 is commanding to marry off those orphens not to marry them its make some sense.
i want to know that how they will translate 3350 and 3337 and what is his opinion about muhammad(pbuh)'s marriages?
peace
-
salam jonny,
i have read his translation just now its nice specially how he translated verse which considered as polygamy permission. he said verse 43 is commanding to marry off those orphens not to marry them its make some sense.
i want to know that how they will translate 3350 and 3337 and what is his opinion about muhammad(pbuh)'s marriages?
peace
Do you have the link?
-
i have read his translation just now its nice specially how he translated verse which considered as polygamy permission. he said verse 43 is commanding to marry off those orphens not to marry them its make some sense.
Peace all,
Just a quote from another article
The verbs Nakaha and Ankaha have the same imperative form Ankuhu - This is the plural form-. The first form of the verb Nakaha (to marry) can be found in many verses 2221, 2230, 422, 243, 3349, 3353, 6010. The second form of the verb (to marry off) can be found in 2432 and 2827.
From http//www.sistersinislam.org.my/print.php?news.1033Have a great day sun
-
verse 2432 has same ANKUHU as verse 43 has. so as u said Ankuhu is in means of "marry off" which is present in 43.
Peace, not "marry off" see example father in law offered i.e. work to sponsor betrothal; obviously daughter/s approved.
2826 said (f) one of them dual O father that hire him indeed best who that hire thou the strong the secure/trustworthy 2827 said indeed I want that unkiaka/betroths you one daughters two mine these two on that thou work for me eight ijajin so if complete thou ten of so from near (i.e. up to) you and not I want that make difficult upon you thou will find me if wills the god from the righteous
43 and if fear you that not deal justly ye of in the bereaved fa-inki ...
425... fa-inkihunna (f/p) by permission family theirs (f/p) ...
2432 wa-anki the unmarried among you ...
maybe u guys should check out
https//www.linkedin.com/today/author/0_2xLgWYnuyBm3AyW9OUFxnN
Peace, he's all over the place goes into rants about Quranists whatever that means, someone studies Qur'an?
On the other hand, the forward block of the Quranist scholars is more dangerous to Islam because somehow they are stuck with their self- invented logics and entangle innocent people in the name of logical understanding of the Quran. Therefore, they are very cunning and fearless in deviation from the right path which has been described in the Quran. Due to which they invent logical lies in the interpretation of the Quran and keep their lies consistent without looking at the words of the Quran. Although, they don?t fully believe in the fake Islamic literature but they take the invented lies of their founders as the last words and keep revising their false translations to make them more and more logical. However, due to their self-centered attitude towards the Quran they could not grasp the true understand of the Quran, they don?t know the aim of revelations of Allah and purpose of sending the Prophets (pbut) including the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). On top of that they falsely claim that they don?t accept the traditions against the words of the Quran. However, not believing in the ?? (Hereafter) mentioned in the words of the Quran against the traditional concept of ?? (Hereafter) and believing in the false traditional concept of sacredness of the pagan shrine Kaaba made by Prophet Ibrahim (pbuh), performing Hajj, Umrah and Qurbani (animal sacrifice) following the pagan rituals are undeniable proofs that the Quranists also follow the non Quranic track. Thus, to keep their invented lies logical and consistent their forward block (new quranists) translate ?? in different meaning to pig. Therefore, according to them it is not HARAM to mean prohibited or forbidden.
16115 only arrama/prohibit upon you the dead and the blood and flesh l-khinzri/the swine and what dedicated to other than the god with it so who forced other than desires and not reverts so surely the god forgiver merciful
-
Salam,
I don't think anyone is "Quranist" anymore, rather submitters to God alone. Only newcomers call themselves Quranist, but that changes after a while.
Where does the term Quranist even come from? Did the sectarians name us that, or was it an early-stage name that submitters gave to themselves?
Anyway, I don't agree with some of Aidid's interpretations. He claims kind words and forgiveness are better than charity while the verse clearly states that kind words and forgiveness are only better if charity is followed by harm. If this was the case I would seek every face on this planet and offer a kind word instead of giving to charity etc.
This is extremely misleading for anyone who only reads Aidid's interpretation. -
Peace, he's all over the place goes into rants about Quranists whatever that means, someone studies Qur'an?
yes you are right.. and he also make fake profiles by time to time for mocking .. (God knows best)
i also try to make people understand to read his full things before deciding anything..
here
https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9609320.msg402230#msg402230sometimes you have to study all the rubbish what a liar brings to you for understanding the purpose behind it..
now read carefully i dnt have any wish to mock or ridicule somebody but as a honest researcher i must share what comes in my findings...
Among the all above stated weak arguments of not having ? ? in the beginning of Saurah Al Tauba I have also found a strong argument in which it was claimed that this surah has been tempered with. In their arguments they claim that the conspicuous absence of ? ? in the beginning of surah Al Tauba is because of this surah represents an advance divine proclamation that the idol worshipers were destined to tamper with the Quran by adding 2 false verses 9128 and 9129, in which the attributes of Allah ? ?, ? ? and ?? were wrongly used for the prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Farsightedly, their arguments seem convincing because the Quran has always used ? ?, ? ? and ?? for Allah alone
now look at this very carefully... what he claim
However, the absence of ? ? from this Sura Al Tauba seems to be a profound sign from the Almighty Author of the Quran that ? ? is not a first verse of any surah and this surah could have been slipped from the eyes of those who have added ? ? in all other Surahs of the Quran. This is not unusual because criminals always commit mistakes unconsciously no matter how careful they are and unknowingly leave signs of their crime which become clues for the investigators to catch them out.
now if you look at the birmingham manuscript of older quran, it seems the bismillah is still there ... which make his claim unworthy and false..
in my findings this doctor is very careless in understanding history and language and more over faith...
if you guys want me to highlight multiple mistakes in all his articles i m ready for that but , what i felt is strange becoz i m not a doctor, or language expert, or historian , or any so called scholar , but i have abilty to check and verify the information , in hand, may b thanx to my (banking)profession.. but i hope its not that hard to cross check things when somebody claim something...
the blue part in his article make sense when you apply the same rule on him muscle
have a bless day Guys
