"We" vs God Alone

progod

Peace,

I concur with Tarikh. My take on it is that I's with no sign of quote is Angel Gabriel (God bless him) for instance ("I am the servant of this land" I believe which is in Chpt. 29). Quoted I's are usually God (quotes in Classical Arabic don't have to begin with 'he said or he says' different ways to quote are the use of wa, an, the obvious qaala and just going into the quote after you have mentioned the subject. See the passages of Abraham's quotes (God bless him) in Chpter 2 of the Quran.

Godbless,
Anwar

Mazhar

Samia said

Quote
The quraan was revealed in a spoken language. Spoken Arabic does not respect grammar.

This is falsehood of the utmost. Just pure and utter falsehood. The written Arabic today was the spoken Arabic of then. (Just as the people during Shakespeares age and the King's James Bible actually spoke that way (on the streets and everything, as opposed to now) The spoken Arabic of today is an invention of the Creolization era where Arabs through contact with non-Arabs formed a creole Arabic which spread and evolved within each different country. Please do not speak these untruths Samia, it cries ignorance. I'm sorry. What you have said above is just wrong, wrong, wrong. Please go listen to Shiekh Sha'rawi or somone from whom you can gleam some truth on these lingustic issues.

Godbless,
Anwar

This is the first time during my stay on this forum that I felt disappointed. A man like me , a non Arab with little knowledge of Arabic, after going through the Quran even once, realizes immediately that it is an address/speech by One in front of whom is the gathering of everyone in time and space. A speaker addressing a very large crowd uses spoken language which conveys the message/perception/thought of the Speaker to everyone in a distinct manner.
Do we find the details of "Arabic Grammer" written somewhere before the revelation of Quran?

arnoldyasin

Salaam Aleikum,

Here are my 2 cents on the Plural use in the Quran

http//ourbeacon.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=113

unknownuser

Salaam Aleikum,

Here are my 2 cents on the Plural use in the Quran

http//ourbeacon.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=113

That was generally my view. Thanks, it was a good read.

This is the first time during my stay on this forum that I felt disappointed. A man like me , a non Arab with little knowledge of Arabic, after going through the Quran even once, realizes immediately that it is an address/speech by One in front of whom is the gathering of everyone in time and space. A speaker addressing a very large crowd uses spoken language which conveys the message/perception/thought of the Speaker to everyone in a distinct manner.
Do we find the details of "Arabic Grammer" written somewhere before the revelation of Quran?

It is both a recital and a book. That implies no division between the language into "spoken" and "unspoken". Also, the messenger is declared as a commoner. Unless you wish to say God's usage of "kitab" is erroneous.

Mazhar

Also, the messenger is declared as a commoner.{OPF}

Quran does not describe the Messengers of Allah as "a commoner". It is the perception of the arrogant rich people of the societies who tried to convince the people under their influence that the Messenger was a "commoner" like them. In front of their people they even never said "Messenger is like us". they told ordinary, common people "He is like you" and dear OPF today you have also started talking in their tone and manner.

If the speech of a speaker is recorded and written that will also be called a Book. Had the Book not been recorded as a speech none would have ever been able to remember it by heart. Where were the principles of grammer recorded/determined/written before or at the time of revelation of Quran? Any reference!! Who taught the Arabic Grammer to Non Arabs/say people of Persia of that time?

Samia

Peace,

Samia said
This is falsehood of the utmost. Just pure and utter falsehood. The written Arabic today was the spoken Arabic of then. (Just as the people during Shakespeares age and the King's James Bible actually spoke that way (on the streets and everything, as opposed to now) The spoken Arabic of today is an invention of the Creolization era where Arabs through contact with non-Arabs formed a creole Arabic which spread and evolved within each different country. Please do not speak these untruths Samia, it cries ignorance. I'm sorry. What you have said above is just wrong, wrong, wrong. Please go listen to Shiekh Sha'rawi or somone from whom you can gleam some truth on these lingustic issues.

Godbless,
Anwar

Salaam Anwar

I would have appreciated seeing "evidence" that the quraan is in classical Arabic, instead of reading accusations from you, and repetition of "wrong, wrong, wrong" without any explanation why it is wrong. We had a similar discussion before and I asked you where you could find a pre quraanic document written in classical Arabic. The only thing you could think of was the so claimed pre islamic poetry! Even if it were really pre islamic, does its language resemble the language of the quraan? I would say spoken Arabic is much nearer to the language of the quraan than this forged pre islamic poetry. The most important proof is the non conformity of the quraan to the rules of grammar set by classical Arabic linguists, as well as the rules for the dual, which are in conformity with the spoken language. Also remember this reply to your questioning of the usage of "maa" in opposition to "lam" to negate a verb

Here I can tell you with confidence that this is the negation used in colloquial arabic for all tenses. Maybe you're right, apart from "maa yazaalu" I can't think of something. But thank you! You just put a further nail on the notion that the qur'aan is in classical Arabic!!

As for spoken Arbic being a "creole", I am really surprised! Do you understand what a creole is? It is not about borrowing words, it is a completely mixture with a different language. We can say "Maltese" is a creole of Arabic. Arabs would not be able to understand it. But saying spoken Arabic is a creole, my question is creole with which language? Does every Arab country has its spoken Arabic mixed up with the languges of its neighbours/colonisers? Then we would not be able to understand each other (with the exception of North African Arabic, which might be nearer to a creole, hence rarely understood by other Arabs). Borrowing in a language does not make it a creole, otherwise we would consider the language of the quraan as "creole" too, since it borrows vocabulary from Greek, Hebrew, Farsi...

TruthOnly

Why is everyone here having such a hard time with a royal we? Maybe its because most of the people here are from western backgrouds hence the use of such language confuses you. Even in Urdu we use words like "Hum" (we) when the speaker is denoting supremacy over the readers or listeners that are being addressed. Its not that confusing, the angels did not create the world and neither can they forgive sins, when God creates something he says "be" and it is. Allah (swt) is the only one that can forgive peoples sins ad create something from nothing. Angels are not "creators", not even close. peace

Samia

Salaam Truthonly

First, welcome to the forum!

When someone uses the royal "we" in a speech this person does not shift to "I" or "he". What made people here discuss this is this feature in the quraan (i.e shifting from the "we" to "he" and/or "I&quot.

And BTW, having a western background does not imply ignorance of the "royal we". After all, westerners have kings and queens and the term "royal we" itself is English, so they know it. It is not invented by Arabs or Urdu speakers.

siki

Dear Brother yasin, salam o alekum.

I read your article, it is a good comprehensive effort, however i do not agree with you on couple of points,

1, A Royal "we" is out of question, it simply has zero possibility.

I did not understand your " God and his Kalimat" term. From where did you get this?

In my opinion when HE uses WE, there are definitely other entities involved, The catch being 2-34

234 And We said to the Angels "Submit to Adam," so they submitted except for Satan, he refused and became arrogant, and became of the rejecter's.

The above gives us an important clue regarding un-described "entities" other than angles and shayateen, who are part of the system, and probably were/are responsible for handling angles and jinns , but now are/ were in the previous/parallel/hidden universe.

Because at this point in time we are not directly concerned/influenced by those entities, so probably any further clue/mention of them in quran was out of the scope for us humans.

siki

Jack

Peace,

What about 'we' as the entities (minus God), is that a possibility?

It does seem to make much more sense. It very much seems like that God is spoken of in the third person. Just throwing out an idea - that's all.

Isn't Gabriel the narrator, in any case

progod

Salaam Samia,

You said

I would have appreciated seeing "evidence" that the quraan is in classical Arabic, instead of reading accusations from you, and repetition of "wrong, wrong, wrong" without any explanation why it is wrong. We had a similar discussion before and I asked you where you could find a pre quraanic document written in classical Arabic. The only thing you could think of was the so claimed pre islamic poetry! Even if it were really pre islamic, does its language resemble the language of the quraan? I would say spoken Arabic is much nearer to the language of the quraan than this forged pre islamic poetry. The most important proof is the non conformity of the quraan to the rules of grammar set by classical Arabic linguists, as well as the rules for the dual, which are in conformity with the spoken language. Also remember this reply to your questioning of the usage of "maa" in opposition to "lam" to negate a verb

First it is your opinion that pre-Islamic poetry is forged. If you put the Quran to the same test you could essentially say it was forged too. As I have tried to explain to everyone over and over again. Besides a few partial scraps that we have left of the Quran that are not even from the 6th century the Quran and pre-Islamic poetry were preserved through classes of narrators. I have given sources to you before and you choose to not to accept and forget. That is the truth reject if you will or accept and research if you will. Also as I have explained over and over again, you don't know what Classical Arabic is. You think that it is the language spoken on the news. That is not Classical Arabic. That is MSA; whether you want to accept that term or not. Classical Arabic was revised in the 1900's and turned into MSA, where the use of maa is looked down upon because it is used so much in dialects as well as other words and uses, some used in dialect some not. You are not reading Classical Arabic grammar books you are reading MSA grammar books. As I have stated to you over and over again both are called Fushaa mistakenly.

Quote from Samia on August 27, 2007, 015559 PM

Here I can tell you with confidence that this is the negation used in colloquial arabic for all tenses. Maybe you're right, apart from "maa yazaalu" I can't think of something. But thank you! You just put a further nail on the notion that the qur'aan is in classical Arabic!!

This reply was completely irrelevant (to be nice). I'm really sick of sounding like a broken record. Classical Arabic is Old Arabic, MSA is Modern Arabic and Dialects are relatively modern creole Arabics. Maa yazaalu is a Classical expression that has been cemented into MSA. That is why it can be exchanged with laa yazaalu. In Old Classical Arabic this is correct. In MSA it is considered incorrect despite cemented archaism like maa yazaalu. Consider the use of expressions that mean (may God bless him and save him) sallaa allahu &alaihi was sallam or dumtum bikhairin, These are expressions that have no grammatical explaination in MSA and you will not find them in MSA grammar books which you are mistaking for Classical Arabic grammar books. However you will find them in Classical Arabic grammar books like Wright or Sibaweyah. As well as the use of maa for present tense negation. It is in Wright's Grammar book and I'm sure it is in Sibaweyah. You are looking at the wrong grammar books. Again there is a difference between Classsical and Modern despite the fact that they are both called Fushaa.

You said

As for spoken Arbic being a "creole", I am really surprised! Do you understand what a creole is? It is not about borrowing words, it is a completely mixture with a different language. We can say "Maltese" is a creole of Arabic. Arabs would not be able to understand it. But saying spoken Arabic is a creole, my question is creole with which language? Does every Arab country has its spoken Arabic mixed up with the languges of its neighbours/colonisers? Then we would not be able to understand each other (with the exception of North African Arabic, which might be nearer to a creole, hence rarely understood by other Arabs). Borrowing in a language does not make it a creole, otherwise we would consider the language of the quraan as "creole" too, since it borrows vocabulary from Greek, Hebrew, Farsi...

Yes the hell i do!!! I studied creoles in college! (And I happen to be in love with them!) It is actually a hobby of mine to study them. Of course creolization is not about just borrowing words, it gets down to the grammar of the language. The Arabic dialects spoken today are a creolization with Aramaic, Egyptic, Himyarite and to some degree persian and Turkish (Aramic dialects are probably the heaviest contributor). You will find that Arabic dialects have alot in common with Hebrew and Aramaic pronunciation and grammar patterns. There were two major breaks in this creole; Eastern and Western. That is why most Eastern dialects Saudi, Yemeni, Egyptian, Gulf, Iraqi, Levant have a similar vein and the Maghribi dialects have similar vein (although they all can differ substantially). Your Eastern branch of Arabic dialects went through the same phase as the Magribi dialect just at an earlier stage, the already creolized Arabic that they recieved now had to deal with Berber accents and corruptions, in addtion to Aramaic and Coptic ones. Western Arabic is also known for its influence from Hassaniyah Arabic which comes from a Yemeni tribe that migrated there. The dialects were first formed in the first territories conquered by the Arabs ( you can see this from Lane's introduction of how the first generation of children of the Arab occupiers when they came to Mecca were not understood by native Meccans) and spread as the Arab territories spread. It seems also that it took root mostly with languages that are of the same family branch as Arabic, the Afro-Asiatic langauges, which is why persian did not transform into an Arabic dialect or turkish despite heavy Arabic influence.

Listen in all essence I am exasperated from trying to tell this to you Samia. It has been months and almost years. I am starting to sound like a broken recored to myself and I feel like I am talking to a brick wall. Mazhar mostly likely will not understand this either. I suppose that you go talk to some very well known sheikhs as well as linguistic professors that major in Old Arabic literature at some prestigious university where you can figure out what I am saying. Because as of now I think that you have no clue of what I'm saying when I talk. You will not believe me nor will you understand what I am saying when I speak to you. The use of maa can be likened to the use of t for past tense in English dialects. It is an archaism that is correct in some cases in Modern English and incorrect in many. But many dialects put it on everything. In both Modern English and dialects it is remnant of Old School English where it could be used that way or the Modern way. So in Old English you could say kilt or killed. But in Modern English you must say killed and in the dialect kilt is prefferred. This goes for many other words as well. The analogy carries over to Arabic with the use of laa and maa in the present tense.

Godbless,
Anwar

p.s. Mostly all langauges are creoles from Older Languages mixing with their counterparts. Latin and Celtic dialects made Spanish, Portuguese and Catalan. Latin and other Italic counterparts made all of the Italian dialects. Gaulish and Latin made French, and so on and so on. You can take any langauge no matter how classical and you will find that it is a combination 2 or more languages that came before it. These combinations can also vary in degree and they create new substratum within a language for it to begin evolve. No langauge evolves without a foreign substratum being introduced. Atleast not since we all spoke one langauge. If we ever did. Its possible that we were all telepathic in the beginning hmm Or maybe we spoken simple sign languages with whistles and clicks. So when human communites branched off and actually decided to start to speak their was a possiblity for variablity because we we started of with basically nothing and then go split up. Oh, well. This last bit is just speculation anyway.

progod

Peace,

Samia,

Here's a little test for you. This has worked on other Non-Maghribi Arabs so I'm sure it will work on you. I hope you haven't conversed with any morroccans cause then this will kill it.

Basically if i said kaayin daabbah tabghee akal, could you tell me what Kaayin and tabghee are and to what Classical words they relate to?

Most non-Maghribi Arabs will hear kaayin and tabghee from a Morrocan and say that is not Arabic. So my question to you is are they Arabic words? And how can I accept testimony from someone who claims to know Arabic and even Fushaa at that and cannot tell me where these simple words come from or what they mean? One of them is even in the Quran!! But if I used it with an non-Maghribi "Arabic" speaker they would look at me confoundedly and say that I was making up words.

Godbless,
Anwar

Mazhar

Dear Anwar,

I don't feel shy in 100% agreeing with you that I could not understand what you said, it seemed to me Spanish and I don't know that. But my little intellect keeps me bothering to understand the concept "Quran is in Classical Arabic" and Quran says about its own language that it is Arabi Mubeen. Should I take the meanings of the word "Mubeen" as "classical" and now try to find a teacher to make me understand "Classical Arabic" and how would I judge/evaluate his credentials {that he is a classical Arab} in the days of what you call MSA or something like that?

Hitherto I had the satisfaction that whenever I will be in trouble about grammer etc Sister Samia will take care of that aspect and rescue me, but now you have classified her as perhaps TV/MSA Arab, I feel disturbed.

Samia

Salaam Samia,

You said
First it is your opinion that pre-Islamic poetry is forged. If you put the Quran to the same test you could essentially say it was forged too.

Salaam Anwar

Thanks for the compliment!! It's not my opinion, it's the opinion of many brave scholars, the most famous is Dr. Taha Hussein whose PhD thesis was on this claimed pre-islamic poetry, and the research took him to an unexpected result (for him). Many studies followed his and no one, to date, could respectfully challenge him (without accusing him of blasphemy) and that his next step would be to claim the quraan was forged! Do I read a similar hadith-defenders-mindset??

I have given sources to you before and you choose to not to accept and forget.

What sources and about what? Don't tell me the one about "inqatal"!!

Also as I have explained over and over again, you don't know what Classical Arabic is. You think that it is the language spoken on the news. That is not Classical Arabic. That is MSA; whether you want to accept that term or not. Classical Arabic was revised in the 1900's and turned into MSA, where the use of maa is looked down upon because it is used so much in dialects as well as other words and uses, some used in dialect some not. You are not reading Classical Arabic grammar books you are reading MSA grammar books. As I have stated to you over and over again both are called Fushaa mistakenly.

Please leave me aside and be professional. Tell me the difference between MSA and classical Arabic, especially grammar-wise, and show us why you believe the quraan is in classical Arabic - and how you respond to what some believe as grammatical errors in the quraan, or its non respect of the classical rules about the dual (both characteristics of the spoken language, not the classical one).

Consider the use of expressions that mean (may God bless him and save him) sallaa allahu &alaihi was sallam or dumtum bikhairin, These are expressions that have no grammatical explaination in MSA and you will not find them in MSA grammar books which you are mistaking for Classical Arabic grammar books.

What? If anyone understands this paragraph, please tell me, honestly (not the part that I mistake grammatical MSA books for classical grammar ones though).
Progod, you think there is a difference in these grammars. Well not as much as the difference between the grammar of the quraan and any grammar of a written Arabic, whether it is MSA or classical.

Just to cut it short, I went through all the mu3alaqat (so claimed pre-quraanic poetry) and here are a few lines from the first three ones (they are seven poems, for those who do not know)
Imri?ul Qais

Zuhair ibnu abi Salma

( ...)
Tarfa Ibnul 3abd

( &#1583
( &#1609
((

http//www.khayma.com/almoudaress/moualakat/index.htm

NONE of them used "maa did not" to negate a present verb in the past. They only used "lam". The lines in brakets (4) have, in two, negation with maa which comes with a special oath (le3amreka I swear by your life) in two different poems. The other two are negation in the present (does not/do not). "maa = did not" is a spoken characteristic, not a classical one, and you confirm that, don't you, progod?

I provided the link for you to verify for yourself, and to find if there are any "maa" used to mean "did not".

As for your long lecture on creole, how is the spoken arabic a creole? Is the MSA a creole too? How are Arabs able to listen to the radio, read papers and even communicate with each other? We have a real Arabic creole in the southern sudan known as "the Arabic of Juba".Learn about it if you do not know it, and you will understand what an arabic creole is...not even compared to the maghreb arabic.

Samia

Peace,

Samia,

Here's a little test for you. This has worked on other Non-Maghribi Arabs so I'm sure it will work on you. I hope you haven't conversed with any morroccans cause then this will kill it.

Well, your test is killed then. I understand Moroccan. Moreover, the verb "abghi I want/request; root Baa Ghain Yaa" is not specific to the moroccan dialect, and it is also a "written" word, so all Arabs understand it. All Arabs knwo, and use, the expression (laa yanbaghi lahu an yaf3ala kaza he is not supposed to do such and such). kaa'in (am,is, are; being) is classical/MSA/spoken word. Its usage as an auxiliary verb is the effect of French grammar on Moroccan dialect.

progod

Peace Samia (Mazhar, I'll respond to you later),

Before I make anymore comments let me get one thing clear, so there is not confusion, and then I will give you all the responses you want.

You said

NONE of them used "maa did not" to negate a present verb in the past. They only used "lam". The lines in brakets (4) have, in two, negation with maa which comes with a special oath (le3amreka I swear by your life) in two different poems. The other two are negation in the present (does not/do not). "maa = did not" is a spoken characteristic, not a classical one, and you confirm that, don't you, progod?

I swore we were talking about maa in PRESENT TENSE (i.e. maa adree or maa tanqusu as in the passages you gave me), and that you were saying that maa used to negate PRESENT TENSE is not used in written Arabic and is only used in spoken Arabic. So what are you saying? Are you saying now that maa in the past tense is not used in written Arabic and only in spoken (dialectical) Arabic? As in MAA kataba and MAA takallama ?

Godbless,
Anwar

Samia

Salaam Anwar

Even if it is about "maa + present tense", this, as I said in that thread, is the way colloquial negates the present tense too (not with laa). So it is not a prove that the quraan is in classical Arabic.

progod

Peace Samia,

(note for those who do not know imperfect = peresent and perfect= past)

That wasn't exactly an answer. But I expected that so let me just keep it short because it seems that you are easily confused (and very defensive) about what I say to you

In Classical Arabic you can negate in present tense with 'laa', 'maa' and 'in' (MSA doesn't use the last one). (you proved that in your quotes of pre-Islamic poetry, even though you somehow thought that that was going to work in your favor. Go figure?).
In MSA you can only negate present tense with laa except for the examples that have been cemented in MSA literature and are remnants from Classical Arabic. Two of these are maa adree and maa yazaalu. This rule of only using laa for imperfect tense in MSA is an invented rule for Modern Standard Arabic (MSA), showing how Classical Arabic is not MSA. Other examples include things like the use of idhin like yawma idhin, as well as forms like talladhhaa (tafa&&alu) (a Classical Arabic variant of form V of ladhaa i.e. tatalladhaa. This also happens with tadhakkaru for tatadhakaru. The perfect form is Ifa&&ala or Ifa&&alla = tafa&&ala), as well as kidh-dhaab a Classical Arabic variant of tak-dheeb not used in MSA.
In dialect you negate present tense (and past tense) only with maa and not laa. This is a remnant of Classical Arabic (which I also call Old Arabic). MSA gravitated to laa in present (and kept maa and lam for past tense) and the spoken dialects gravitated to maa only (for present and past), but Classical Arabic as we see in Pre-islamic poetry, the Hadeeths and the Quran use both.
By your post I guess you realized that you are just confused and decided to cover you behind. Listen, if you are just confused just say so and I will try to help you understand, but don't go grabbing at straws because you are confused or getting defensive then confounding the issue because you want to "show me". You just make yourself sound bad. I think anyone who knows even basic Arabic (not dialects) knows that past tense negation can be maa fa&ala or lam yaf&al interchangeably. Again the dialects' use of maa is a remnant of Old Arabic which uses maa to negate nouns, perfect and imperfect verbs. (laa is used also in imperfect and in perfect when preceded by wa or fa and 'in' is used with imperfect and perfect verbs).

I'll stop now. You have said so much that if I go on I am afraid that you will start confusing things. We will go with this for now. And when I'm clear on whether you understand and accept what I am saying or misunderstand and reject it then I will make good on the Arabic dialects= Arabic creoles topic.

Godbless,
Anwar

ehawk35

Hi Progod
You are right."maa" is used with past and present tenses in classical arabic both aspects (spoken and written).

( 1 / 55)
. . . . . " "

. { } " " " ".

Samia

Salaam progod

I admit I can easily be distracted, and you are good in distracting your interlocutor! Just look at the post by ehawk35 who, I believe, thinks that the argument is about the negation in CA.

You are the one confusing things and bringing about Modern Standard Arabic and its modes of negation.

Let's not confuse it further. The issue is Is the quraan's language CA? I say, No. quraan is revealed in a spoken language and you say Yes in classical Arabic. I did not bring up the issue of MSA, you did. So leave MSA out of this.

Your arguments for Quraan revealed in Classical Arabic are

Difference in grammar (e.g usage of maa + present tense) which MSA does not endorse
Other pre Islamic documents (e.g jahili poetry) which agree with the quraan in the language
(If you have any other argument, please bring it and let's discuss it)

My argument for quraan revealed in spoken language (and refuting your points) are

First there is no difference in grammar between MSA and CA (not really an argument for my case but a response to your statement). There IS non respect of grammar in spoken Arabic and in the quraan alike.
Even if MSA does not endorse "maa + present tense", this is of no value since MSA is not part of the comparison. Spoken Arabic uses "maa +present tense" to negate an action in the present time, just like the quraan.
There are no pre-islamic documents to compare the quraan to, or to call them "CA". CA is post quraanic., as well as jahili poetry.
The so-called jahili poetry has nothing in similarities with the language of the quraan vocabulary is not as easy and clear as that of the quraan (a lot of it is not heard of after that), it respects the grammar of the MSA as we know it today (because both are written languages), unlike the quraan, which does not even respect the rule of the dual and treats it like the plural (as in the spoken language).