2 questions concerning chapter/surah 30 about the romans...
-
I have seen how rum and feel can mean other things as well. Feel can mean something along the lines of doubt and confusion, and rum something like worldy desires as Mz say but I need to jog my memory. Mz, would you mind posting the citations, word by word, of lane for rum and feel. That would help your point if you could actually post the citations for everyone to see.
I'm going to look it up for myself as well, but please post your evidences if you are going to make claims.Godbless,
Anwar -
Dear Anwar,
You had reached a conclusion. Mz has again made you double minded. He is interpreting and drawing meanings after finding a word ?desires? on page 359 of volume 3 of Lane Lexicon, against , . . I feel disappointed and sorry that a man like Anwar could be misled by mz who is just trying to make mockery of Arabic words. The verse starts with and even a man like me of ordinary knowledge of Arabic language know that it is singular feminine, showing one thing of past. And the second word is prefixed with ?Al?. And defeat of a nation, kingdom is narrated by a feminine word. is masculine and always compares two things. A linguist is expected to ignore such observations/interpretations or loudly call them a foolish idea instead starts following it to find some substance in it.
Wa in tuti' aksara man fil ardi yudillu_ka 'an sabililla_h(i), iy yattabi'u_na illaz zanna wa in hum illa_ yakhrusu_n(a). {6116}.When one thing is more than clear and supporting evidence is also their would it be a prudent behavior to keep running after conjectures and what people are inventing?
-
Dear Anwar,
You had reached a conclusion. Mz has again made you double minded. He is interpreting and drawing meanings after finding a word ?desires? on page 359 of volume 3 of Lane Lexicon, against , . . I feel disappointed and sorry that a man like Anwar could be misled by mz who is just trying to make mockery of Arabic words. The verse starts with and even a man like me of ordinary knowledge of Arabic language know that it is singular feminine, showing one thing of past. And the second word is prefixed with ?Al?. And defeat of a nation, kingdom is narrated by a feminine word. is masculine and always compares two things. A linguist is expected to ignore such observations/interpretations or loudly call them a foolish idea instead starts following it to find some substance in it.
Wa in tuti' aksara man fil ardi yudillu_ka 'an sabililla_h(i), iy yattabi'u_na illaz zanna wa in hum illa_ yakhrusu_n(a). {6116}.When one thing is more than clear and supporting evidence is also their would it be a prudent behavior to keep running after conjectures and what people are inventing?
At least you wasn't angry like
021.068
YUSUFALI They said, "Burn him and protect your gods, If ye do (anything at all)!"I have learnt to use the God given intelligence Br rather then thinking i am making any type of mockery of any language , but to you your way.
God Bless.
-
"I have learnt to use the God given intelligence Br rather then thinking i am making any type of mockery of any language , but to you your way"
But you don't seem to have given some "intelligence" to what was said. "knowledge" based on "Perhaps" is not intelligence, it is conjecture and wishfull thinking. Page No and Volume of Lane has already been indicated in red. Also please consult about the other words used in the verse, otherwise what you say is nothing but your "desire", "imagination" . And it leads to nowhere but to the place where the followers of wanted to throw syedna Ibrahim {peace is upon him} but the end result was their own humiliation.
-
Dear Brother,
Here is reflected your habit of drawing conclusion from half statement while ignoring the last part. When you do it like this the perception you may get will always be contrary to what had been said. You omitted "what had been said". I don't feel hard, but in responding I try that the viewers/readers may also get some new point to ponder. What I suggested was that in addition to word "desire" used by Lane in a different context, the meanings of other words used in the verse may also be taken care so that a truthful perception could be conceived.
-
Salaams Br,
What I suggested was that in addition to word "desire" used by Lane in a different context, the meanings of other words used in the verse may also be taken care so that a truthful perception could be conceived.
A nice suggestion Br. It is however unfortunate some of us don't have much time.
I would like to say one thing though - the languages become rigid as they get established in time , but when a language first starts off it hardly has any rules and the quran came at such a time , so the grammer rules didn't apply as much then - i think.
God Bless.
-
Dear brother,
Nothing gets rigid. Grammer is not that important, O kay. But the words have specific meanings. Quran is called Mubeen and its language is Arabic Mubeen. And the very word Mubeen clarifies that the meanings of a statement/word of Quran cannot be two or three. Quran is made easy because of it being Mubeen. Then its ayat have been "" i.e. seperated/segregated so that everything becomes distinct. Again its ayat have been "" which means to distinguish the two things, segregate right from wrong, knowledge from conjecture, truth from falsehood since the job of the judge is to decide and segregate two things. And Quran is still made easier by so that even a man of ordinary prudence could perceive the stated thing from all angles comprehensively. Quran says right has been segregated from wrong. But our problem is that we don't have much of time and see Quran only as a side activity.
-
Salaams Br,
May be you are a new comer to researching the quranic text
But most of the research has I believe already been done and it is in the so many topics here on free-minds.Mubeen clarifies that the meanings of a statement/word of Quran cannot be two or three.
Qd says;
Mubeen = clear/ open to see/ self expressive.
And just check lanes how many meanings an Arabic word can have!
Quran says right has been segregated from wrong
Okay!
But, but don?t forget there is so much false ideology embodied into the translation of the quran it?s hard to believe ? its actually the pagan religion that a certain group of people followed which was never part of the quran sorry to say.
Thanks.
-
Peace Mazhar,
Don't be so hasty in judgement. Me and you have discussed a few things which you hav been mistaken about when it comes to Classical Arabic grammar and the Quranic text. Let me do my research and then I'll get back to all. But please don't be in a haste to judge Mz or my ability to understand Classical Arabic (especially when you have seen that I have good knowledge of it and study all possibilities to the best of my ability). Thanks.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Dear Aarun,
This style of things is like the one regarding which Allah and Quran says, " " Following the Book may I ask you all to bring if you are truthful. Merely reading from the preface of Lane about Classical Arabic does not become the knowledge and Burhan. And remember one thing. Lane did nothing except compiling from couple of lexicons, which took him quarter a century, thanks to the sponsorship of the Duke and after his death continuation of the project was considered possible only by the grace of his widow, Her Grace the Duchess.
-
Brother,
The Book has given you a principal. If someone makes a statement he is to be asked to bring the evidence if he is truthful with regard to what he says. If he can't bring the evidence then we have to say that what he says is nothing but conjecture and speculative assertion.
-
when this book says "bring forth proof if you are truthful" who is it directed towards?
2111, 393, 3183, 4122 (Allah is the most truthful), 771 (burden of proof on a messenger), 7106 (Pharoah asking Moses for proof), 1038 (those who refuse the authenticity of the Quran as from Allah asked to bring another one), 1113, 1132, 157 (unreasonable demands need no proof), the list goes on and on.
Mazhar is correct. It's a principle, not just a snippet of history. So 2111 could equally be "The Sunnis and Shia say "none shall go into heaven unless he is a Sunni or Shia", Say Bring your proof if you are truthful". If we are to take it as snippets of history, a significant portion of the Quran would be nullified.
-
Salaams Maz,All,
The Book has given you a principal
The book did give us a principal - but the problem is a lot of the principals given are incorrect as they don't agree with the real world, and using a dictionary people have realised that a lot of the principles are wrong words - and that is all.
So you can try the different meanings of words to see which makes sense- use lanes dictionary.
one example - the book says men were physically changed into monkeys and pigs - and people have accepted this for many hundreds of years but only know, like progod, people are saying it differently - using dictionaries.
I hope i didn't missunderstand you.
Salaam.
-
Peace,
I would like to say one thing though - the languages become rigid as they get established in time , but when a language first starts off it hardly has any rules and the quran came at such a time , so the grammer rules didn't apply as much then - i think
No offense MZ, I have been following what you are saying and find it all very, very relevant. However I could not disagree with the above statement more. Grammar is the glue that makes language work and has and always will be important. The reason we find that grammar in our modern languages is not always in line with how we speak is because our book grammar is usually based upon archaic dialects or specific dialects of our language groups and we speak different dialects which don't follow all of the same rules.
Classical Arabic grammar came about from studying all of the usages of Old Arabic and its dialects. It is an archaic langauge now which is why modern Arabs who speak a Modern forms of Arabic, especially modern standard which is a revised version of Old Arabic with dialect influences, find Old Arabic difficult with all its case endings, cumbersome or awkward and want to say that Old Arabic didn't follow all of those rules that they read about because they don't use them in their modern evolutionized dialects of the language (Like Spanish, latin and french evolved from Latin, but cannot be considered Latin anymore, However oddly, Modern Arabic dialects are still considered Arabic (because of the influence that Arab nationalism, tribal organization & Arabization in Islam had on the once non-Arab peoples of the Middle east and North Africa).)
Grammar did matter and when you read about (Old) Classical Arabic grammar, not just Modern Fushaa rules, you are studying how the old Arabs used their language, no, they didn't think of their language in the terms of "grammar" and grammatical rules but still followed these rules even though they had no names for them and it just felt natural to them. The names and the classifications of these uses and usages of the language came latter, but the Old Arabs still used them naturally even before they had names for them.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Salaams progod,
of course i agree with that , but i suppose depends how a person says it - i mean the strength of the grammer initially i am sure must be zero , with words appearing and gradually some form of grammer appearing in time.
Like the first steam engine - look what happened to engines later rockets to the moon very intricate structures indeed similar to the process of grammer Or language rules - i think.
God Bless.