Can we finally answer the question of timing of salaat and sawm?

Allen

Peace Warner,

We cannot understand the word "ramadan" by looking at it in isolation. We have to take the whole expression "shahr ramadan" and try to undestand it. Accordingly, here is what we can easily know from the great reading alone (even without dictionaries)

"shahr ramadan" is not an abstraction but is an actual observable phenomenon that can be witnessed.

Ayman

(2185)
In this verse the word "Ramadan" is being used as a "diptote".So it must be a "Proper noun"
Secondly word "shahida " does mean ' to witness" but it is not its only meaning.Its other meaning is "to be present".

{ }

( 1 / 2061)
} {

.

. . . .

( )
)

Whosoever is present during this month (Ramadan) is bound to fast.

ignoramus

salam brother Allen

would you mind elaborating please?

if you mean by present on earth (i.e. alive) this seems superfluous. if not, how do you understand 'present'?

salam

ayman

Peace Allen,

Thank you for your comments.

(2185)
In this verse the word "Ramadan" is being used as a "diptote". So it must be a "Proper noun"

This is what we are taught in school and most people accept it without questioning. In reality, the Arabic grammar that we are taught at school is different from the grammar of the great reading. People typically realize this when they study it more in depth. When we research and study pre-quranic and early post-quranic Arabic, we can immediately see the following facts

None of the early quranic or Arabic manuscripts have case endings or any vocalization marks. It is not until the 9th - 10th century CE that we gradually see consistent vocalization in manuscripts of the great reading. This is a full 300-400 years after the revelation of the great reading.
Moreover, even without the indisputable archeological evidence, an intelligent reading of the text will show that vocalization marks have very low functional load. In fact, they have such low functional load that people have naturally realized that they are useless and modern standard Arabic has done away with them. Thus you are able to read Al-Ahram newspaper and clearly understand what it says without case endings or any vocalization marks whatsoever.
It is clear from reciting the great reading itself that it originally didn?t have case endings. Thus, nobody, even the most ardent believer in case endings ever recites the Fatiha as

"bismi allahi alarhmani alarahimi, alhamdu lilahi rabi al?alamina, alarhmani alarahimi, maliki yawmi aldini, Iyaka na3budu wa iyaka nasta?ainu, ihdina alsirata almustaqima, ... wa la aldalina. "

Everyone who recites the great reading routinely and completely ignores case endings because most passages in the great reading sound awkward with them. For example, try reading Chapter 55 with the case endings and you will see why everyone intuitively doesn't use the vocalization marks for the case endings there. Just listen to any recitation. You will NEVER hear anyone saying "AlrahmanU 3allama alquranA". You will ALWAYS hear them say "Alrahman 3alam alquran". Even the most stringent defenders of vocalization marks and Sibaweh's grammar are forced to read it this way and are forced to admit this fact. Reading it any other way would sound terribly awkward and pretentious. So it is a fact that the great reading didn?t originally have case endings and those are completely manmade.

Even the consonantal text of the great reading often shows complete disregard of case endings. Some well-known examples include 569 where "Sabi'una" should be "Sabi'ina" according to the rules of so-called Classical Arabic. Another is "moqimin" should be "moqimun" in 4162 and in 2177 "sabirin" should be "sabirun", etc.
There is absolutely no evidence of a pre-quranic month named Ramadan.

Based on the above facts, your observation about the case ending doesn?t really have much weight. Add to this the actuality that the common noun meaning of "ramadan" fits in the context and there is really nothing to support the proper name theory. Thus the initial part of 2185 can be translated as follows

A scorching full-moon is the one where the intense reading was descended...

Secondly word "shahida " does mean ' to witness" but it is not its only meaning. Its other meaning is "to be present".

I think that besides the obvious redundancy of such meaning as Ignoramus pointed out above, there is no other occurrence in the great reading where the meaning of "shahida" is "to be present", so why single this occurrence as the odd one out?

Peace,

Ayman

Allen

Peace Allen,

Thank you for your comments.

This is what we are taught in school and most people accept it without questioning. In reality, the Arabic grammar that we are taught at school is different from the grammar of the great reading. People typically realize this when they study it more in depth. When we research and study pre-quranic and early post-quranic Arabic, we can immediately see the following facts

None of the early quranic or Arabic manuscripts have case endings or any vocalization marks. It is not until the 9th - 10th century CE that we gradually see consistent vocalization in manuscripts of the great reading. This is a full 300-400 years after the revelation of the great reading.
Moreover, even without the indisputable archeological evidence, an intelligent reading of the text will show that vocalization marks have very low functional load. In fact, they have such low functional load that people have naturally realized that they are useless and modern standard Arabic has done away with them. Thus you are able to read Al-Ahram newspaper and clearly understand what it says without case endings or any vocalization marks whatsoever.
It is clear from reciting the great reading itself that it originally didn?t have case endings. Thus, nobody, even the most ardent believer in case endings ever recites the Fatiha as

"bismi allahi alarhmani alarahimi, alhamdu lilahi rabi al?alamina, alarhmani alarahimi, maliki yawmi aldini, Iyaka na3budu wa iyaka nasta?ainu, ihdina alsirata almustaqima, ... wa la aldalina. "

Everyone who recites the great reading routinely and completely ignores case endings because most passages in the great reading sound awkward with them. For example, try reading Chapter 55 with the case endings and you will see why everyone intuitively doesn't use the vocalization marks for the case endings there. Just listen to any recitation. You will NEVER hear anyone saying "AlrahmanU 3allama alquranA". You will ALWAYS hear them say "Alrahman 3alam alquran". Even the most stringent defenders of vocalization marks and Sibaweh's grammar are forced to read it this way and are forced to admit this fact. Reading it any other way would sound terribly awkward and pretentious. So it is a fact that the great reading didn?t originally have case endings and those are completely manmade.

Even the consonantal text of the great reading often shows complete disregard of case endings. Some well-known examples include 569 where "Sabi'una" should be "Sabi'ina" according to the rules of so-called Classical Arabic. Another is "moqimin" should be "moqimun" in 4162 and in 2177 "sabirin" should be "sabirun", etc.
There is absolutely no evidence of a pre-quranic month named Ramadan.

Based on the above facts, your observation about the case ending doesn?t really have much weight. Add to this the actuality that the common noun meaning of "ramadan" fits in the context and there is really nothing to support the proper name theory. Thus the initial part of 2185 can be translated as follows

A scorching full-moon is the one where the intense reading was descended...

I think that besides the obvious redundancy of such meaning as Ignoramus pointed out above, there is no other occurrence in the great reading where the meaning of "shahida" is "to be present", so why single this occurrence as the odd one out?

Peace,

Ayman

In arabic "i3raab" mean a lot no matter these are in written form as in "Al-kitaab" or in the spoken form.
Here the verse under discussion is using " "
What is your opinion about it ?
1Was it revealed with this spoknen i3raab (ramadaana) as it is in the Mushaf ??
2Was it revealed with some other spoken i3raab but changed later ?

Bigmo

The previous scriptures are superceded by a commandment in quran.

siki

Thats not what the Koran says. See attachment

Bigmo

Peace to all.

The ritual I detailed was a product of my researches as a faithful quraan alone muslim.
The truth is that people will spend countless hours trying to uncover the proper way of performing salaat according to the Quraan. Unfortunately they will never find it.
The Quraan is not an educational text, meaning there is nothing in the Quraan which is truly new. It's all about clarifying the mistakes of the past communities and explaining the nature of Allah. So you will never find a detailed explanation of Salaat, nor how to give Zakaat, or even the process of becoming a Muslim (shahaadah).
The Quraan is a wonderful and edifying scripture. It must however take its place alongside the other scritpures of Allah.
Have a wonderful day,
Talib ben Abraham

True but however its seems the koran and the previous scriptures talks about 3 prayers a day. One in the morning and one in the evening and one in the middle between noon and sunset.

http//pressthat.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/salat-timings-of-quran/#comment-1083

ayman

Peace Allen,

In arabic "i3raab" mean a lot no matter these are in written form as in "Al-kitaab" or in the spoken form.

I am not sure what you mean but the vocalization marks cannot be found in the written form until the 9th-10th century CE and in the spoken form didn't have the vocalization as shown by the example I gave you from Chapter 55. So for either written or spoken the vocalization marks are manmade.

Here the verse under discussion is using " "
What is your opinion about it ?
1Was it revealed with this spoknen i3raab (ramadaana) as it is in the Mushaf ??
2Was it revealed with some other spoken i3raab but changed later ?

No. It was revealed as " " . The vocalization is irrelevant. In fact, we don't even know how the regular letter sounded. For example, there is evidence that the "Kaaf" was pronounced as "Ch" at the time and not as "K". Some Arabian dialects still have this pronounciation today.
No, the text didn't follow the strict Arabic I3rab rules that we know today. I already gave you several examples that don't conform to those rules. The great reading is in the language that the people of the prophet spoke at home and on the street at the time of the revelation. It is perfectly normal that such common people languages are highly informal and do not follow rigid rules and this is confirmed by many examples in the great reading.

Peace,

Ayman

Allen

Peace Allen,

I am not sure what you mean but the vocalization marks cannot be found in the written form until the 9th-10th century CE and in the spoken form didn't have the vocalization as shown by the example I gave you from Chapter 55. So for either written or spoken the vocalization marks are manmade.

No. It was revealed as " " . The vocalization is irrelevant. In fact, we don't even know how the regular letter sounded. For example, there is evidence that the "Kaaf" was pronounced as "Ch" at the time and not as "K". Some Arabian dialects still have this pronounciation today.
No, the text didn't follow the strict Arabic I3rab rules that we know today. I already gave you several examples that don't conform to those rules. The great reading is in the language that the people of the prophet spoke at home and on the street at the time of the revelation. It is perfectly normal that such common people languages are highly informal and do not follow rigid rules and this is confirmed by many examples in the great reading.

Peace,

Ayman

The phrase "
How was it pronounced when it was revealed as
-Ramadan
-Ramadana
-Ramadani
-Ramadanu
-Ramadanan
-Ramadanun
-Ramadanin
You do not know that i3raab can change the meaning entirely.Take the example of a word" "
If you pronounce is as '3aalim" = scholar ,if you prounce is as "3aalam = world or universe.
So it has to be decided "Ramadan" the way it was pronounced when it was revealed.
1If it is in the form the way it is written in the Quran - then it is a "diptote"
2If it was in some other form different than that of today then it is definitely changed then you have to provide the evidence/proof.

Probably you are confusing tajveed method.At the end of any sentence the Arabs always show "sakoon" but in the middle of sentence.This is word is in the middle of sentence.

Arabs have never pronounced "kaaf " as "Ch" .Evidence please .

Bigmo

True but however its seems the koran and the previous scriptures talks about 3 prayers a day. One in the morning and one in the evening and one in the middle between noon and sunset.

http//pressthat.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/salat-timings-of-quran/#comment-1083

Actually upon investigation I now understand it different. The verses says

011.114
YUSUFALI And establish regular prayers at the two ends of the day and at the approaches of the night For those things, that are good remove those that are evil Be that the word of remembrance to those who remember (their Lord)
PICKTHAL Establish worship at the two ends of the day and in some watches of the night. Lo! good deeds annul ill-deeds. This is reminder for the mindful.
SHAKIR And keep up prayer in the two parts of the day and in the first hours of the night; surely good deeds take away evil deeds this is a reminder to the mindful.

The word here is "atraf" of the day and the "ghasag" of the night. Atraf means side edges of the day. Daytime is defined as sunrise to sunset. Now if you have a road, the 2 side edges of the road means the right side of the road and the left side of the road which means before sunset and after sunrise. These are the two side edges of the day. Then it talks about ghasaq which means darkness.

113.003
YUSUFALI From the mischief of Darkness as it overspreads;
PICKTHAL From the evil of the darkness when it is intense,
SHAKIR And from the evil of the utterly dark night when it comes,

This is the second last surah of the Koran and uses ghasaq, menaing darkness or utter darkness. So we have 2 prayers at the two side edges of the daytime, fajr and maghrib and then night time.

This is confirmed here

017.078
YUSUFALI Establish regular prayers - at the sun's decline till the darkness of the night, and the morning prayer and reading for the prayer and reading in the morning carry their testimony.
PICKTHAL Establish worship at the going down of the sun until the dark of night, and (the recital of) the Qur'an at dawn. Lo! (the recital of) the Qur'an at dawn is ever witnessed.
SHAKIR Keep up prayer from the declining of the sun till the darkness of the night and the morning recitation; surely the morning recitation is witnessed.

This is from the decline of the sun till nightfall meaning maghrib. This now makes sense since the koran then says

002.238
YUSUFALI Guard strictly your (habit of) prayers, especially the Middle Prayer; and stand before Allah in a devout (frame of mind).
PICKTHAL Be guardians of your prayers, and of the midmost prayer, and stand up with devotion to Allah.
SHAKIR Attend constantly to prayers and to the middle prayer and stand up truly obedient to Allah.

This middle prayers must be maghrib, since its short.

So the Koran mentioned 3, one fajr and maghrib, also these are the two side edges of the daytime, both before morning and after sunset, which is fajr and maghrib, and the one at the darkness of the night, isha. This is confirmed also in

024.058
YUSUFALI O ye who believe! let those whom your right hands possess, and the (children) among you who have not come of age ask your permission (before they come to your presence), on three occasions before morning prayer; the while ye doff your clothes for the noonday heat; and after the late-night prayer these are your three times of undress outside those times it is not wrong for you or for them to move about attending to each other Thus does Allah make clear the Signs to you for Allah is full of knowledge and wisdom.
PICKTHAL O ye who believe! Let your slaves, and those of you who have not come to puberty, ask leave of you at three times (before they come into your presence) Before the prayer of dawn, and when ye lay aside your raiment for the heat of noon, and after the prayer of night. Three times of privacy for you. It is no sin for them or for you at other times, when some of you go round attendant upon others (if they come into your presence without leave). Thus Allah maketh clear the revelations for you. Allah is Knower, Wise.
SHAKIR O you who believe! let those whom your right hands possess and those of you who have not attained to puberty ask permission of you three times; before the morning prayer, and when you put off your clothes at midday in summer, and after the prayer of the nightfall; these are three times of privacy for you; neither is it a sin for you nor for them besides these, some of you must go round about (waiting) upon others; thus does Allah make clear to you the communications, and Allah is Knowing, Wise.

Here Fajr and Isha are mentioned. So we have 3, one in fajr and one in maghrib, these are the 2 side edges of the daytime, both before sunrise and after sunset, and the 3rd is Isha. This also means that fajr is before sunrise and maghrib is after sunset but before darkness.

Allen

Ayman
Here is an example of arabic without i3raab to solve.
Here is a word for you to translate

She created
You (male) created
You (female) created
I created
She was created
You (male) were created
You (female ) were created
I was created
Which one translation will you select ?

Second example

What is your translation?

scholar man's slave
Man's scholar slave

Samia

Salaam Bigmo

I think maghrib is sun set, ishaa is just before sunset to just before darkness. After that we have "lail night". So there are two salaat

fajr before sunrise
ishaa (from when the sun rubs horizon daluukush shamsi (maghreb) until the near night)

tarafai annahaar the TWO edges of day. One salaat at each edge.

Verse 24 58 does not mention maghrib salaat or any other salaat during the whole day except two, the only salaats that are mentioned by name in the whole quraan fajr and ishaa (other than jum3a congregational salaat).

Wustaa is not just middle, but also means moderate. If God did not mention three salaats, how can we discuss a midle one? So I think it is the moderate salaat, not the middle one

Samia

Salaam Allen

No book, newspaper, magazine, pamphlets...etc is wirtten in vocalized Arabic. We understand it from the context. Also, you mix between case endings (grammar) and other short vowels that differentiate between words that have the same spelling (like the example of 3aalim and 3aalam, both written as ). Their difference is not grammatical, but even though, without the internal vocalization (under or above the laam) we can still differentiate between them in context; maybe not if they are isolated words. The quraan is not made up of isolated words.

Allen

Salaam Allen

No book, newspaper, magazine, pamphlets...etc is wirtten in vocalized Arabic. We understand it from the context. Also, you mix between case endings (grammar) and other short vowels that differentiate between words that have the same spelling (like the example of 3aalim and 3aalam, both written as ). Their difference is not grammatical, but even though, without the internal vocalization (under or above the laam) we can still differentiate between them in context; maybe not if they are isolated words. The quraan is not made up of isolated words.

Ok No isolated words

It is a full sentence What is its translation ?

Scholar man's slave came
-Man's scholar slave came
Another sentence
She wrote a letter
You (male) wrote a letter
You (female) wrote a letter
I wrote a letter

Another example

-The speaker (addresser) came
-The addresse (addressed ) came

Who beat whome ?
-Zaid beat Ahmed
-Ahmed beat Zaid

Another example

How will you translate it ?

The pen broke
Did the pen break ?

All of them are complete but simple sentences by themselves.Let us see ,being arabic ,how can you translate them correctly.

Please translate them

ayman

Peace Allen,

The phrase "
How was it pronounced when it was revealed as
-Ramadan
-Ramadana
-Ramadani
-Ramadanu
-Ramadanan
-Ramadanun
-Ramadanin

It was probably pronounced as none of the above. It was probably pronounced as "ramdan" or maybe "rumdan".

You do not know that i3raab can change the meaning entirely.Take the example of a word" "
If you pronounce is as '3aalim" = scholar ,if you prounce is as "3aalam = world or universe.

It is the same as writing in English "trip". Do I mean "stumble and fall" or "going on a journey"? As sister Samia pointed out, the context is what determines the correct meaning. Why do millions of people understand what is meant by "trip" despite the absence of vocalization marks? Are the English more intelligent than the Arabs? Of course not! This is why when you read Al-Ahram newspaper in Arabic and you read the word " " WITHOUT VOCALIZATION, you are able to understand if it means scholar or world/universe. Do you think that the average reader of Al-Ahram is more intelligent then the average reader of the great reading? Do you think that the god is only addressing idiots who can?t figure out such simple things from the context? I hope not!

Again, given the uselessness of vocalization marks, it is not surprising that Modern Standard Arabic has done away with them. Also, it is not surprising that early Arabic and quranic manuscripts are completely devoid of them. Do you think that the vocalization marks suddenly became not useful? No, they always were useless. They are manmade information that was added later to the text when the religious clergy wanted to formalize the language and erect a language barrier so that people can?t use their minds to figure things out from the context. Thus, the clergy convinced even intelligent people that they should become mindless readers who would have to go to the clergy for interpretation when they want to find out if " " means scholar or world/universe.

There is nothing extraordinary about what I am saying. The only reason it sounds strange to you is that this is what all of us were taught in Arab schools and as children we accepted it blindly and were prevented from taking a critical approach to it or questioning its validity. What we are talking about now is not what one would typically learn at school but is what one would discover if he did some more critical study or graduate research.

So it has to be decided "Ramadan" the way it was pronounced when it was revealed.
1If it is in the form the way it is written in the Quran - then it is a "diptote"
2If it was in some other form different than that of today then it is definitely changed then you have to provide the evidence/proof.

The form it is written in the ORIGINAL great reading had no vocalization marks so it was not "diptote".
Nothing was changed. However, some clearly superfluous stuff that can easily be ignored was added. The vocalization marks were added, just like the chapter titles were added, just like the verse numbers were added, just like the "Makkiya/Madiniya" conjecture was added, etc. Again, all this is superfluous junk that can be ignored by intelligent people.

Probably you are confusing tajveed method.At the end of any sentence the Arabs always show "sakoon" but in the middle of sentence.This is word is in the middle of sentence.

So are you saying that the great reading was recited by ignoring the case endings for words at the end of the sentence? Are those words less or more meaninglful than average words? What is the use of case endings then if they can be routinely ignored like this? Or are vocalization marks suddenly not important in this case?

Besides, what you are saying is not accurate because in chapter 55, "alrahman" by itself is not a sentence and the sentence is "alrahman alam alquran". So "alrahman" is in the BEGINNING of the sentence and yet the case ending is ignored.

Arabs have never pronounced "kaaf " as "Ch" .Evidence please .

This is a very strong opinion. One should avoid as much as possible using absolute words like "never" and "always" unless he is absolutely certain. Please see

http//www.study-arabic.info/advice/arabicquran.htm

http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_Arabic

Also, I would suggest subscribing to Arabic satellite television that shows programming from gulf countries such as Saudi Arabia to get familiar with their dialect. What you will hear for yourself is that 'Kaaf' often becomes 'ch' in the Gulf, Iraq and in some Bedouin dialects.

Here is an example of arabic without i3raab to solve.
Here is a word for you to translate

She created
You (male) created
You (female) created
I created
She was created
You (male) were created
You (female ) were created
I was created
Which one translation will you select ?

Here is an example of an English word without context for you to solve "created"

She created
You (male) created
You (female) created
I created
She was created
You (male) were created
You (female ) were created
I was created
I had created
Had I created (i.e., I actually did not create)
Which one of the meanings will you select?

Second example
What is your translation?

scholar man's slave
Man's scholar slave

Ok No isolated words

It is a full sentence What is its translation ?

Scholar man's slave came
-Man's scholar slave came
Another sentence
She wrote a letter
You (male) wrote a letter
You (female) wrote a letter
I wrote a letter
Another example

-The speaker (addresser) came
-The addresse (addressed ) came

Who beat whome ?
-Zaid beat Ahmed
-Ahmed beat Zaid
Another example

How will you translate it ?

The pen broke
Did the pen break ?
All of them are complete but simple sentences by themselves.Let us see ,being arabic ,how can you translate them correctly.
Please translate them

Example

I hate annoying people.

What is your interpretation?

I hate people who are annoying.
I hate to annoy people.

Another example

Put the box on the table by the window.
What is your interpretation?

Take the box on the table and put it by the window.
Take the box and put it on the table that is next to the window.

Etc., etc., etc...

All of the above are complete and simple sentences by themselves. Let us see, how you can interpret them correctly.

How come no one is suggesting that we should use vocalization marks to resolve those English examples? I hope that you can see that ambiguity exists in all languages and that they are resolved using context NOT vocalization marks. Thus, it is not surprising that the case endings in Arabic have very low functional load (i.e., they are useless) because the context is what determines the meaning.

Peace,

Ayman

Jack

salam all

3831-32 is that referring to ishaa? Or it could be a salat between the two?

doesn't 2238 make it that there has to be a 'middle' or 'moderate' salat? It can't mean 'best' there. If there are only two salats doesn't that make it a contradiction?

Can we also take into account 20130 and 3017 in this discussion?

Allen

Peace Allen,

It was probably pronounced as none of the above. It was probably pronounced as "ramdan" or maybe "rumdan".

I do not know the reason of your annoyance.The only reason I could chalk out because you could not translate a few simple sentences without vocalization marks.Can you tell me the reason why you could not translate them and instead of attempting them you tried to "mock" which is by itself a negative behaviour if you are serious.
Now coming to the point.You said that

It was probably pronounced as none of the above. It was probably pronounced as "ramdan" or maybe "rumdan".

Both will be written as " " ------- A
One with "ru-- and other with ra---" but case ending is same.I do not know whether you mean case ending as " "-----B
Please do clarify which of the case ending with "Tanween (A) or with "-noon ----(B) " do you mean because both of them are not present in the Quran now available.
After your selection of A or B I will comment further.

Samia

Ok No isolated words

It is a full sentence What is its translation ?

Scholar man's slave came
-Man's scholar slave came
Another sentence
She wrote a letter
You (male) wrote a letter
You (female) wrote a letter
I wrote a letter

Another example

-The speaker (addresser) came
-The addresse (addressed ) came

Who beat whome ?
-Zaid beat Ahmed
-Ahmed beat Zaid

Another example

How will you translate it ?

The pen broke
Did the pen break ?

All of them are complete but simple sentences by themselves.Let us see ,being arabic ,how can you translate them correctly.

Please translate them

Salaam Allen

This sentence has conveniently the verb "came" to make one of the nouns in the nominative case, whereas all the others (possibly except one, according to the meaning of the senetnce) are in the genetive. What if it was ? All nouns will be in the genetive case (kasra). Case ending will not solve this problem. Context will.

Calls for context. If no context, just an isolated sentence, does it really matter what it means? Why would one just write such a sentence? is a complete sentence and does not need vocalization, yet it is meaningless without context. Same goes to the two sentences that follow.

Now tell me, what does vocalization or case ending have to do with the translation you gave? This is about question marks, punctuation. Do you see any question marks in the quraan? Or even comas, semi colens...etc?

Tell me what do you understand from the chief of the tribe known of having some canibalism activities when he says "The priest? Yes I met him. I had him for dinner"?

Remember that spoken Arabic does not care at all about case endings. The quraan was revealed in the spoken form.

ayman

Peace Allen,

I do not know the reason of your annoyance.The only reason I could chalk out because you could not translate a few simple sentences without vocalization marks.Can you tell me the reason why you could not translate them and instead of attempting them you tried to "mock" which is by itself a negative behaviour if you are serious.

There is no need for you to feel annoyed. You couldn't interpret the English sentences that I gave you, which demonstrates that vocalization marks are irrelevant. What matters is the context. In ANY LANGUAGE, if one can't figure out the context from one sentence then he needs to look at other sentences surrounding it and so on. This is an INDISPUTABLE fact so there is nothing mocking or funny about pointing it out and I don't see how you can take this to be negative behavior. Please don't be overly sensitive and focus on the issues.

Now coming to the point.You said that
Both will be written as " " ------- A
One with "ru-- and other with ra---" but case ending is same.I do not know whether you mean case ending as " "-----B
Please do clarify which of the case ending with "Tanween (A) or with "-noon ----(B) " do you mean because both of them are not present in the Quran now available.
After your selection of A or B I will comment further.

It is not my problem if you don't read carefully. Here is what I said yesterday

It was revealed as " " .

Peace,

Ayman

Samia

Both will be written as " " ------- A
One with "ru-- and other with ra---" but case ending is same.I do not know whether you mean case ending as " "-----B
Please do clarify which of the case ending with "Tanween (A) or with "-noon ----(B) " do you mean because both of them are not present in the Quran now available.
After your selection of A or B I will comment further.

Salaam Allen

If your problem is with the transliteration, then it is ramadaan and ramudaan. From the context it could be figured ;D

ayman

Peace sister Samia,

If your problem is with the transliteration, then it is ramadaan and ramudaan. From the context it could be figured ;D

It could also be "RaMDAN" (weight Fa3LAN, like GhaDBAN/angry) or "RuMDAN" (weight Fu3LAN, like SuLTAN/intense authority).

Peace,

Ayman