Can someone please clarify the wording in 17:46
-
I hope this verse/sign isn't off-topic, but same message of God alone
3936 IS NOT God enough for His servant? And yet, they would frighten thee with those beside Him! But he whom God lets go astray can never find any guide
Alaysa Allahu bikafin AAabdahu wayukhawwifoonaka biallatheena min doonihi waman yudlili Allahu fama lahu min hadin
(
-
Peace all,
Grammatically and linguistically it can ONLY be GOD ALONE in 1746.
This has been discussed in detail elsewhere
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=13288.msg111034#msg111034
http//www.muslimwakeup.com/bb/viewtopic.php?t=5603&highlight=
-
Peace OPF,
It can be both/either, same as in verse below?
3945 Wa-itha thukira Allahu wahdahu ishmaazzat quloobu allatheena la yu/minoona bial-akhirati wa-itha thukira allatheena min doonihi itha hum yastabshiroona
Literal And if God was mentioned/remembered alone (the) hearts/minds (of) those who do not believe with the end (other life) became uptight/repulsed, and if those from other than Him were mentioned/remembered then they are announcing good news/rejoicing.
7204 When the QUR'AN is read, listen to it with attention, and hold your peace that ye may receive Mercy.
To me the two verses dont look the same.
1746 ..... wa-itha thakarta rabbaka fee alqur-ani wahdahu .....
3945 ..... Wa-itha thukira Allahu wahdahu .....In the first verse the word wahdahi (one/alone) is following the word Quran.
In the second verse the word wahdahi is following the word Allah.1746 .... If discuss God in Quran alone
3945 .... If discuss God alone ....Am I right?
-
I remember the above discussion taking place a few years ago at the submitter's quran study group, where half the group went one way and the other half the other way and soon became a heated brawl and this subject was halted to carry onto another. Likewise there were problems concerning other verses in similar ways, I believe one of them was the number 19 issue. Some "god" I must say! & hail
-
Case closed )
Thanks all.
Case closed )
I remember the above discussion taking place a few years ago at the submitter's quran study group, where half the group went one way and the other half the other way and soon became a heated brawl and this subject was halted to carry onto another. Likewise there were problems concerning other verses in similar ways, I believe one of them was the number 19 issue. Some "god" I must say! & hail
Yes, people tend to be human.
-
When you go back to verse 1742, you find the root of this verse (46)
"Say If there were other gods with Him as they say ..."
The translation would be what brother Tanweer mentioned God aloneTo me the two verses dont look the same.
1746 ..... wa-itha thakarta rabbaka fee alqur-ani wahdahu .....
3945 ..... Wa-itha thukira Allahu wahdahu .....In the first verse the word wahdahi (one/alone) is following the word Quran.
In the second verse the word wahdahi is following the word Allah.1746 .... If discuss God in Quran alone
3945 .... If discuss God alone ....Am I right?
The only important thing to make the two verses differ in meaning is the vocalization of "wahdahu or wahdihi", not the position of words. The Arabic sentence is not structure sensitive.
itha thakarta rabbaka fil quraani wahdahu wahdahu (alone) is related to rabbaka
iha thakarta rabbaka fil quraani whdihi wahdihu is related to alquraaniIt does not matter where you put wahdahu after rabbaka/Allah or after alquraan. What matters is its grammatical vocalization which determines its function.
-
Another one )
3926 - 3929. Please note the context of 3929.
-
Peace Brothers/Sisters
I posted this on another thread... However, since same thing is being discussed here, I am pasting the post here also... Please read thoroughly and verify for yourself before responding... Thank you...
I performed some research regard the verse 1749 whether the WAHDAHOU in the verse is used for Allah or for the Quran... My earlier position was that WAHDAHOO is for Allah and in the verse, it should be translated GOD ALONE and not QURAN ALONE... According to grammar rules... I did not deeper research on this we could not reach an agreement and my research lead me to conclude that INDEED, WAHDAHOO is being used for Allah and not for the Quran... I will expose my findings here and anyone can reply me on this....
First and foremost, I would like you to ask yourself this question... DO YOU THINK THERE ARE COINCIDENCE IN THE QURAN? For example, regarding the use of words, the placement of these words as well as the number these words has been used all over the Quran...
My personal answer to this question... I firmly believe that there is NO SUCH COINCIDENCE in the Quran and everything presented in it, in whichever way, has a purpose... and meaningS....
So regarding WAHDAHOO....
My first step is to go through the Quran index (Mo3JAM AL MUFAHRIS) and to look for how many times the word WAHDAHOO has been used...
The word WAHDAHOO has been used 6 times exactly all over the Quran in the following verses... 770/1746/3945/4012/4084/604
770 They answered "Hast thou come to us that we worship God alone, and give up all that our forefathers were wont to worship? Bring about, then, that with which thou hast threatened us, if thou art a man of truth!"
1746 for, over their hearts We have laid veils which prevent them from grasping its purport, and into their ears, deafness. And so, whenever thou dost mention, while reciting the Qur'an, thy Sustainer as the one and only Divine Being, they turn their backs in aversion.
3945 And yet, whenever God alone is mentioned, the hearts of those who will not believe in the life to come contract with bitter aversion - whereas, when those are mentioned side by side with Him, lo, they rejoice!
4012 ?This because, whenever the One God was invoked, you denied this truth; whereas, when divinity was ascribed to aught beside Him, you believed ! But all judgment rests with God, the Exalted, the Great!?
4084 And then, when they beheld Our punishment, they said ?We have come to believe in the One God, and we have renounced all belief in that to which we were wont to ascribe a share in His divinity!?
604 Indeed, you have had a good example in Abraham and those who followed him, when they said unto their people "Verily, we are quit of you and of all that you worship instead of God we deny the truth of whatever you believe; and between us and you there has arisen enmity and hatred, to last until such a time as you come to believe in the One God!" The only exception was Abraham's saying to his father "I shall indeed pray for forgiveness for thee, although I have it not in my power to obtain anything from God in thy behalf." "O our Sustainer! In Thee have we placed our trust, and unto Thee do we turn for unto Thee is all journeys' end.
If you read these verses and study it, you will immediately notice that in each and every instance the word WAHDAHOO is being used, it is attached to GOD... In all 6 instances... So do you think it is a coincidence.... and 1746 should stand out of the crowd... and wahdahoo being attach to Quran.... This is definitely not the case according to the way Allah has used the word WAHDAHOO in all these 6 times...
Those who do programming will know that there are RESERVE WORDS which cannot be used to identify other variables... For me, it seem that WAHDAHOO is reserved only to be used with GOD since ISLAM is about worshipping ONE AND ONLY GOD and not associating anything with it... Therefore, WAHDAHOO which means HIM ALONE is being used with GOD all over the Quran... Look for yourself and see if you can find other verses where WAHDAHOO is being used with something else... I challenge you that you will not find any...
I have taken a big RISK here by saying the ALLAH uses WAHDAHOO for him alone... I came to this conclusion because I did not find other cases of the noun WAHD being used in the QURAN except like WAHDAHOO... there is NO WAHDAHAA,WAHDANAA,WAHDAKA,WAHDAKI,WAHDAHOUMAA and so on... ONLY ONLY WAHDAHOO is present in the QURAN... You think its a coincidence? ...
So my findings regarding the WAHDAHOO issue is as follows, every single instance where WAHDAHOO is being used by GOD, it is been used to refer to HIM ALONE and not anyone/anything else...
These findings are based on the Quran and it use as a SELF REFERENCE GUIDE.... So remember my first question... DO YOU BELIEVE IN COINCIDENCES IN THE QURAN??
Another proof of how the Quran explains itself and erase all confusion that might arouse....
Allah knows best...
-
When you go back to verse 1742, you find the root of this verse (46)
"Say If there were other gods with Him as they say ..."
The translation would be what brother Tanweer mentioned God aloneThe only important thing to make the two verses differ in meaning is the vocalization of "wahdahu or wahdihi", not the position of words. The Arabic sentence is not structure sensitive.
itha thakarta rabbaka fil quraani wahdahu wahdahu (alone) is related to rabbaka
iha thakarta rabbaka fil quraani whdihi wahdihu is related to alquraaniIt does not matter where you put wahdahu after rabbaka/Allah or after alquraan. What matters is its grammatical vocalization which determines its function.
Correction The whole part in italics is wrong. Please ignore it. The "wahdahu" is always in the accusative as it is always considered "condition ", not adjective.
Peace
how you write
whdihi
same using Kesra or adding Yah
Peace.Please see above correction.
-
Peace Samia and WayFinder,
bravo bravo
-
According to Arabic grammar, "wahdahu" in 1746 can refer only to "rabbaka"/your Lord.
-
By cross referencing in alquran, "wahdahu" is always used for God.
-
There is no such thing as "wahdihi" so it cannot be "wahdihi" in 1746 referring to alquran.
-
The context of 1746 of "tawheed" and similarity with 1741 also points out to "wahdahu" referring to "rabbaka".
HENCE 1746 CAN ONLY BE TRANSLATED AS "LORD ALONE".
-
-
Correction The whole part in italics is wrong. Please ignore it. The "wahdahu" is always in the accusative as it is always considered "condition ", not adjective.
Please see above correction.Peace
ould you please explain more. and anybody kows when and who did vocalization of Quran
here is oldest one do not have vocalization.
http//www.bibleprobe.com/othmankoran.jpg
http//www.irfi.org/articles/articles_401_450/oldest_quran_in_the_world.htm
peace -
Peace to all,
Weren't we just having this same conversation in another thread?
HENCE 1746 CAN ONLY BE TRANSLATED AS "LORD ALONE".
If 1746 was translated directly as "Lord alone", it would read like this "rabbaka wahdahu fee alquran", just like all the other verses mentioning the worship of "GOD alone", attaching the word "wahdahu" to "GOD" or "Lord". Instead, however, 1746 says "rabbaka fee alqurani wahdahu". Do you think this wording by GOD was coincidental? I don't believe the Lord to be a god of coincidences, so I believe that He intentionally attached the word "wahdahu" to "alquran"; this was not a mistake. Do you feel differently?
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Peace bro
Yes I do feel differently ) ...
As I pointed out, WAHDAHOU is always being used as HAAL in the QURAN... And grammar-wise, context-wise as well as per the global usage of WAHDAHOU in the QURAN, it has always been attached to ALLAH because the deen of AR-RAHMAAN is to worship him ALONE....
As far as translation goes... You CANNOT translate the verse as QURAN ALONE... However, as I pointed out in the other thread... The 1746 is a little different in the sense that firstly WAHDAHOU is not directly after RABBAKA and secondly, RABBAKA is being used in this verse whereas in all the other verses ALLAH is used... Again this is not coincidence... the meaning is far bigger... And we can DEDUCE logically by this difference in the phrase composition that it LORD ALONE is SUPPORTED through the QURAN ALONE....
Again, this is deduction/interpretation but not direct word for word translation.... Literal translation is LORD ALONE...
Allah knows best...
-
Peace WayFinder,
Yes I do feel differently ) ...
So, you feel that GOD made a mistake with the wording?
Literal translation is LORD ALONE...
The simpler way of stating "Lord alone" would be "rabbaka wahdahu". So, why are the words "rabbaka fil alqurani wahdahu" instead of "rabbaka wahdahu fil alquran"? Wouldn't this be more logical? Do you think GOD made a mistake in this verse?
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Peace WayFinder,
So, you feel that GOD made a mistake with the wording?
Sincerely brother... Did you really think I mean this?
The simpler way of stating "Lord alone" would be "rabbaka wahdahu". So, why are the words "rabbaka fil alqurani wahdahu" instead of "rabbaka wahdahu fil alquran"? Wouldn't this be more logical? Do you think GOD made a mistake in this verse?
Peace,
Ahmad
Bro, who said there is a mistake in this verse... it is only you saying this... This verse has no mistakes and is 100% correct grammatically... I already gave an explanation on this phrase composition several times now... I do not know why some bros are brickwall brickwall like this...
Forcing a meaning on some verses WILL NOT WORK.... Sorry for that bro.... However, you should read my most recent post before this one and you will get a better understanding of what I want to say....
If you keep doing it this way, people will not believe because the TEXT is not saying what you are implying... Believe me, I know what I am advocating, here in my country, books have been written to REFUTE those who follow QURAN ONLY... and one of their strong points is this verse and its WRONG translation by Quran Aloners.... I am saying it again, there are so many other verses which STATES CLEARLY that the QURAN is the ONLY revelation to be FOLLOWED... No need to force meanings into them, so use these plain verses instead... It will be much better....
Allah knows best
-
Peace WayFinder,
Forcing a meaning on some verses WILL NOT WORK.... Sorry for that bro.... However, you should read my most recent post before this one and you will get a better understanding of what I want to say....
I'm not talking about forcing a meaning on anything, and I'm not talking about grammatical application. I'm talking about the direct, literal translation. In all the other verses, the word "wahdahu" appears directly after the subject, GOD Himself. However, in this verse, it doesn't appear this way. So, based on clear verses from the Quran in all the other instances, GOD says
Allahu wahdahu
Allahu wahdahu
Allahu wahdahu
Allahu wahdahu
Allahu wahdahuIn the instance of the word "rabb" in place of "allah", it would say "rabbaka wahdahu". So, even based on the other well-defined verses, it would present a clearer message by saying "rabbaka wahdahu fee alquran" (lord alone in the reading). Instead, though, it says "rabbaka fee alqurani wahdahu".
rabbaka wahdahu fee alquran ----- rabbaka fee alqurani wahdahu
So, if these two meanings are the exact same thing, if GOD was presenting a clear message, which according to the quran He was, then why wouldn't He state the first instead of the second? The second statement produces a grouping of the words to fit this arrangement
-rabb (lord or master)
-fil (in/within)
-alquran (the reading)
-wahdahu (alone)Why would GOD place such an unclear statement in His clear book (299; 2216; 241; 3443; 467)? Why would GOD arrange the words in a way in which they say "alquran wahdahu" (quran alone) instead of "rabbaka wahdahu" if He was referring to "your lord alone"? Wouldn't this cause confusion?
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Why would GOD place such an unclear statement in His clear book (299; 2216; 241; 3443; 467)? Why would GOD arrange the words in a way in which they say "alquran wahdahu" (quran alone) instead of "rabbaka wahdahu" if He was referring to "your lord alone"? Wouldn't this cause confusion?
Peace,
Ahmad
Peace Bro Ahmad
I do not know if it is only me.... but I DO NOT SEE ANY CONFUSION in this verse.... And it is VERY CLEAR too... So why confusion? Arabic language is not about the position of the words.... clever positioning of the words might be used to put emphasis or attract your attention on something... However, the grammar is very rigid and positioning of the words usually will not distort an intended meaning....
The composition of this verse is done in such away to arouse our attention on the QURAN ALONE also.... I do not argue that at all....
However, translating word for word will mean GOD ALONE.... I think this case should be closed....
Allah knows best