Help with Quranic Word!
-
Dear Sister your response raises several issues that need discussion and clarification.
- Tajweed can not be just equated to correct recitation. As a mater of fact all languages develop as spoken language first. The scripts are developed later to preserve spoken language. Hence the need to preserve as close to spoken language in script, so by creating sounds close to a given spoken language, one can understand same meanings as originally intended. Otherwise there could be no purpose of making sounds as close to spoken, originally. Hence purpose of Tajweed should be understood in this context. This to convey proper meaning of words by reading the script.
Allow me to disagree with you here. To preserve as close to spoken langage in script one has to believe first that the script was revealed in a spoken language. This is not the undersanding of Arabic grammarians who invented classical Aabc and tashkeel (hardly found in any spoken Arabic). The proof is that Arabic grammar rules are often diregarded in the language of the qur'aan. Moreover, no spoken Arabic I know of apply any of the rules of Tajweed. Tajweed is an extra compilcation to the language, applied only to qur'aan. Why? If it conveys proper meaning, it would have been applied to hadith, e.g. If we can understand hadith and classical poetry in their far from beautiful language without tajweed, we can defintely undersand the qur'aan without it.
- As for Tewin to just say it for making sounds or facilitate pronunciation could not be the only purpose. Furthermore, all translation of Arabic works of Grammar. This includes William Wright, Fisher, Palmar and Lutuf ur Rehman from Quran College in Lahore Pakistan agree. That Tewins are used to decline nouns. In this situation it is applied over last word. Grammatically and orthographically these are Tenwin of Fetha Accusative or in Arabic Nsab, Tenwin of Duma Nominative or in Arabic Rafa and Tenwin of Kesra Genitive or in Arabic Jer.
I do not know who says tanween is to facilitate pronunciaation; I do not any way. And yes there are tanweens of declination and nomination, but they are hardly used in the spoken language. In most spoken dialects, there are some words which are usually only pronounced with tanween fat7a such as ithan; jiddan (very); ghadan (tomorrow); 7alan (immediately); qaT3an (sure)....I do not know of words in the spoken language where the tanweens of declination and nomination are used, not in my dialect at least.
- Tenwin of Fetha is followed by an Alif, but does not add any to meaning to the word.
Not nececessarily. Words ending in taa marbuuta; isolated hamza; alif maqsuura; original alif or alif with a hamza do not carry an extra alif and have the tanween above the final alphabet, for example
I agree with you that it does not add to the meaning, but it's more for emphasis.
- Hence keeping these in mind word . root can not be but it should be .
6 However, question remains why a was preferred in script over an Alif to follow a Tenwin of Fetha in this case?
Point 5 is not correct, hence your wondering in point 6. The alif maqsuura is never an extra letter. It is not part of the letters that change the pattern of a word or are affixed/suffixed/prefixed to the root to have a new pattern. The only extra alif (or maybe it's the origine?!!) is the alif maqsuura to make an adjective feminine, exactly like the taa marbutta, as in akbar (m) kubraa (f)
-
Allow me to disagree with you here. To preserve as close to spoken langage in script one has to believe first that the script was revealed in a spoken language. This is not the undersanding of Arabic grammarians who invented classical Aabc and tashkeel (hardly found in any spoken Arabic).
Sister, by using word SCRIPT, I was not implying great reading/Alkitab itself. There is no doubt the book was revealed in the spoken language of people prophet's time. This spoken langauge could have been only preserved by writting, using a form of script of writting. This the vary written script that we have today with us. There is nobody who anymore speaks or even writes this language any more. If I understood you correctly you are acknowledging this fact as well.
I agree Tajweed as promoted and understood today is complete distraction for understanding the Alkitab.
Hence keeping these in mind word . root can not be but it should be .
Why can not a here indicate a personal pronoun following ? in accusative case i.e, with tenwin of fetha.Badar
-
Hence keeping these in mind word . root can not be but it should be .
Why can not a here indicate a personal pronoun following ? in accusative case i.e, with tenwin of fetha.Badar
Good! We are agreeing more and more!
What do you mean by a personal pronoun? Is it as in "my hud" (i.e possessive pronoun)? If so, this personal pronoun is a yaa , not alif maqsuura , thus would have been not .
Moreover, (again assuming you mean a possesive pronoun), the first part of an idafa construct never carries a tanween, even if the whole construct is indefiniteWhy do you suggest that this word hud is a two-lettered-rooted one?
-
Sis sorry for belated response. I had to be away to fulfill a personal commitment. What is your understanding/defination of Tajweed. Are you implying that purpose of all Harkaat is just for Tajweed i.e., to faciltate correct pronunciation only and they do not impart/add meanings to consonant based roots.
Badar
-
My understanding of tajweed is that it's one artificial way of "reading" the qur'aan. Tashkeel is not mainly for tajweed, but it's another artificial tool, not indespensible for comprehending. Broadcasters make many "tashkeel" mistakes, but few people pay attention to that, and it does not make their message incomprehensible. Also, all Arabic speakers who can read books, newspapers, magazines...etc which have no tashkeel, read them and still understand them, and they would wrongly read the vocalization of the qur'aan, (the only document in Arabic that's fully vocalized), and still understand it. tashkeel can be useful to direct a word towards a specific meaning when the context may not show its meaning; but can also be exploited to draw a word away from its real meaning to impose on the reader another meaning.
Tajweed shows some vocalization that's unaccepted by the rules of vocalization, such as "shadda on an initial letter", but they do not claim that it's grammar, but for the sake of helping the student of tajweed recognize where to assimilate two seperate words and make them sound like one. In grammar, this may happen, but the two words are considered, and written, as one word, such as in
-
Respected Sister thanks for sharing your understanding of this issue. Also you are imlying that your mother tongue in one of the dialect of current spoken language. Let me humbly ask you this. What is the meaning of word . In your opinion does this word need any Harkaat to make it's meaning to be understood. If yes, what should be those Harkaat? Thanks again for your keen participation in discussion.
Badar
-
Respected Sister thanks for sharing your understanding of this issue. Also you are imlying that your mother tongue in one of the dialect of current spoken language. Let me humbly ask you this. What is the meaning of word . In your opinion does this word need any Harkaat to make it's meaning to be understood. If yes, what should be those Harkaat? Thanks again for your keen participation in discussion.
Badar
You're welcome.
There are two different kinds of "harakaat short vowels"
- Those which form part of the word for example the damma and sukuun on one and the two fat-ha on the other and . These vowels are respected in all spoken and written dialects because they affect the very meaning of the word. They are the counterparts of the short vowels in any other language (just as in sun and son).
- Grammatical vocalization, usually at the end of the word, and without which the meaning of the word is not affected, e.g and (the book, for all three words). They are normally neglected in the spoken language, except for a few words emphasized with tanween such as "shukran"; "3afwan"...
- There's, however, another kind which falls between the two the one linked to mrphology, and which,then, forms part of the word and is therefore not neglected in the spoken language such as (accuser) and (accused).
For the word , if it's just written, it could be either ablution or two words and light, and thus would mean and light. The spoken is not different from the written, since the difference here is essential vocalization and not grammatical one,i.e, if it's pronounced, one would know whether it's "ablution" or "and light".
-
Thanks again, sister, for detailed answer. I am glad that now I may be able to high light the issue with language by example. The with Harkaat will only be interperated as ablution "an act of cleaning", a verb, as this is common understanding. It is written with Teskeel as . However, if we look up Lane's lexicon he is translating from authentic arabic sources as this word non-exsistent in classical Arabic, though found in many tradition. Instead a word with fetha did exsist, a inf. noun, meaning he was or became fair, beautiful, neat. Furthermore, the measure deviates from constant rule in this case. Hence, to imply that speakers of modren spoken language would understand Alkitab without proper teshkeel, seem far fetched. Yes, they will only understand the meanings of words that are prevalent at their time. In addition with out teskeel in Quran, there will be no way to get to correct meanings, specially when meanings can change so much by changing one sign of teskeel.
Lane's page
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume8/00000199.pdf
Furthermore, to say that ending harkaat have no meanings in or in any other word, is not correct either. Please pay attention to meaning "it was done", expressing an action, depending upon or proceeding from some one, resulting in a certain condition. Tenweens are vowels for nouns. Tenween of Fetha indicating objective, expressing state or condition. Tenween of Kesra, genitive or dependent, on the preceeding word. Tenween of Duma , nominative or accusative, in which form alone it can act as agent to a verb. However, when definate article is added to a noun it loses tenween and vowel becomes coressponding single vowel sign of Fetha, Kesra or Duma, while retaining corresponding meanings. However, verbs have single vowels signs, adding same meanings like examplified in .
Pleas consider above.
Badar
-
The with Harkaat will only be interperated as ablution "an act of cleaning", a verb, as this is common understanding. It is written with Teskeel as .
- What do you mean by "interpreted as ablution"?
- Who writes it like this ?
This word does not even exist in the qur'aan so you cannot say that "harakaat" is essential or not to understand it. Moreover, the context will dictate what "harakat" to apply, not the other way round.
What's the missing letter in the word between brackets in each of these two sentences
My "sxn" is in 6th grade.
I love the "sxn"?Furthermore, to say that ending harkaat have no meanings in or in any other word, is not correct either. Please pay attention to meaning "it was done", expressing an action, depending upon or proceeding from some one, resulting in a certain condition. Tenweens are vowels for nouns. Tenween of Fetha indicating objective, expressing state or condition. Tenween of Kesra, genitive or dependent, on the preceeding word. Tenween of Duma , nominative or accusative, in which form alone it can act as agent to a verb. However, when definate article is added to a noun it loses tenween and vowel becomes coressponding single vowel sign of Fetha, Kesra or Duma, while retaining corresponding meanings. However, verbs have single vowels signs, adding same meanings like examplified in .
BadarWhat type of the following kinds of harakaat would you apply to your example? Please refer to my post when reponding to what I wrote. At least I would know what you misunderstood
There are two different kinds of "harakaat short vowels"
- Those which form part of the word for example the damma and sukuun on one and the two fat-ha on the other and . These vowels are respected in all spoken and written dialects because they affect the very meaning of the word. They are the counterparts of the short vowels in any other language (just as in sun and son).
- Grammatical vocalization, usually at the end of the word, and without which the meaning of the word is not affected, e.g and (the book, for all three words). They are normally neglected in the spoken language, except for a few words emphasized with tanween such as "shukran"; "3afwan"...
- There's, however, another kind which falls between the two the one linked to mrphology, and which,then, forms part of the word and is therefore not neglected in the spoken language such as (accuser) and (accused).
If you speak of grammatical "harakaat" and support your argument with examples from essential morphology harakaat, your conclusion is definitely invalid. I do not need harakaat to understand who the agent or patient in such a sentence
, and do not need a lesson in grammar to know that "muttaham" is dfferent from "muttahim".You cannot come up with an example showing that grammar tashkeel/harakaat is indispensible. This is a late invention that lacks originality, and just could not stick. Native speakers are the worst when it comes to applying grammar harakat (from my experience), and they still make themselves understood.
-
Dear Sis, Let me clearify some of my expression mistake as well elaborate further on issues under discussion.
- What do you mean by "interpreted as ablution"?
- Who writes it like this ?
What I meant to say was that word "with out Harkaat" and not with Harkaat, will always be interperated by a modren Arabic speaker as act of ablution before prayer. I never said it occurs in Alkitab. All tradition books have written it as . In addition, please open the link to lane's lexicon and see what he is translating from authentic Arabic lexicons. Please confirm or refute him by confirming FROM the original referances, if you can access them. Furthermore, with out different Harkaat, there would have been no way for even natives NOW TO REALISE THAT THERE EXSIST TWO DIFFERENT WORDS WITH SAME THREE CONSONANTS AND COMPLETE DIFFERENT MEANINGS, JUST BASED ON DIFFERENCE IN HARKAATS. One of them did not even exsist in classic language, but used and performed atleast five times by most today. How do you explain this?
I do not need harakaat to understand who the agent or patient in such a sentence. Agreed for this purpose most native will not need any grammatical help in most languages. Although in most languages there are clues to indicate in a sentence. What do you feel now these markers are, if Harkaat of tenwen are not needed? Furthermore, for non speaker this will become a great issue and hence some markers are certainly needed, specially in language where most sentences consists of only few words, unlike English.
Badar
-
Dear Sis, while I wait for your response to the previous post. Let me continue to bring issue with example from Alkitab. This word we have discussed before . I can not find this in Lane. Word that has meaning of guidance is with fetha . What do you feel is the explanation here? Thanks as always.
Badar
-
What I meant to say was that word "with out Harkaat" and not with Harkaat, will always be interperated by a modren Arabic speaker as act of ablution before prayer. I never said it occurs in Alkitab. All tradition books have written it as .
Sorry for the belated response.
L.Lexicon does not differ from any CA dictionary in this entry. Nowhere in the link does LL says that waduu'; (with any harakaat) means anything other than ablution. Maybe your are confusing it with (wadu'a verb to be /become illuminated; and always with a final fatha, since it's a perfect/past tense). The spelling of both words is different. Also, one is a noun and the other is a verb, so no place for confusion and no need for tashkeel/harakaat/vocalization context rules.Dear Sis, while I wait for your response to the previous post. Let me continue to bring issue with example from Alkitab. This word we have discussed before . I can not find this in Lane. Word that has meaning of guidance is with fetha . What do you feel is the explanation here? Thanks as always.
I am surprised that you can't find it in LL. What root did you search (should be Haa Daal Yaa)?
You mean example from the qur'aan "Alkitab"? Please give me the verse where you ind this word . -
Dear Sis, thanks for reply. I know you are very busy. I thank you for just putting up with me. Please see at the bottom of link page above. Lane is pointing out with duma translated as act of ablution from Arab authority being unaware/denied as part of classic. Hoever, one with fetha translated as water, which will be a noun being approved.
As regards , referance from Alkitab is 22 and many others. However, when I look under Haa Dal Yaa in Lane, I don't find one with duma, except when he quotes from Alkitab. In quotes from Alkitab, he is pointing to word with duma. However, as root words from linguistic point of view, he cites the first Harkaat, on Haa is always fetha on this page. Here is link for your ease, where you will not find a word with a Duma on first Haa, with meanings suggestive of guidance, a course, conduct, method etc. It is always fetha. How do you explain this? Thanks
Badar
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume8/00000296.pdf
-
This is what LL says
signifies The act of ablution, 41c. (~, I~)
(see 8 ); and , the water with which that
act is performed, or the water that is prepared
for that act, (., g, TA,) and is said to be also
an inf. n., or they are syn. words
of two different dialects, each sometimes used as
an inf. n. signifng the act, (though inf ns. of
the measure deviate from the constant rule,
TA,) and each sometimes as signifying the
water. (, , TA.) AA says, that signifies
the water with which one performs the
ablution above mentioned; " and he knew notand A'Obeyd disallows , and allows only
He just cites what other CA scholars say, and he clearly syas it's either or, and that each word is used for water or ablution
As for your other querry, he seems to start his entries with the simple perfect verb (form I), except when form I is not in use (so he is one who sees the perfect verb as the root). This is what I noticed in the two links you provided. That's why you see he starts with , which is the perfect (past) tense. Maybe you can investigate this with other roots.
I do not see where it quotes from Alkitaab. The first sentence is not a part of any verse, the second, , he gives its meaning as "alqur'aan"He is following, or he follows a
right direction.- The Kur-an -
AA says, that signifies
the water with which one performs the
ablution above mentioned; " and he knew notand A'Obeyd disallows , and allows only
Sis, how are you making your conclusion, that A'Obeyd disallows and allows only , as in the page from Lane both words are written with fetha in this quote from A'Obeyd, likely a printing error. But hard to decide which one is allowed and which one disallowed. Likely, when word and this method of ablution does not occur in Alkitab, unlikley to be suggested by prophet.
Badar
-
Sis, how are you making your conclusion,
Context, Badr, context! I know there was a typo, but what A'Obeyd says can't be the same as what AA says. Moreover, Lane says both words are used for both meanings, therefore he has to provide evidence for each usage, not two evidence for one only.
Likely, when word and this method of ablution does not occur in Alkitab, unlikley to be suggested by prophet.
It does not matter what word is used for ablution. Since we understand what it meant, and what it meant is there in the qur'aan, what's the problem? The problem is the twisting of the method. I do ablution as instructed in the qur'aan, but still call it "". The hadith uses many words as they are in the qur'aan, but gives them a different meaning. Would this hadith's meaning be OK because it's using the same word as cited in the qur'aan? What word do you suggest to reflect the qur'aanic meaning for ablution (mind you, the qur'aan does not give a word, but detailed instructions of what to do before salaat)? Do you believe that ablution (whatever the arabic word for it might be) does not occur in the qur'aan?
-
Thanks Sis. Do you have any means of verifying this Quote from original source. The reason it is important, because the word Wadu is not mentioned in Alkitab. Furthermore, if this word as a verb, as performed by people now five times/day did not exsist in CA. This fact would be clearly, one more proof that all those Hadith, about act of ablusion, relating to five times prayer and these prayers attributed to noble prophet are a later innovation. Quranic word for ablution you already know is in 56
Badar
-
Thanks Sis. Do you have any means of verifying this Quote from original source. The reason it is important, because the word Wadu is not mentioned in Alkitab. Furthermore, if this word as a verb, as performed by people now five times/day did not exsist in CA. This fact would be clearly, one more proof that all those Hadith, about act of ablusion, relating to five times prayer and these prayers attributed to noble prophet are a later innovation. Quranic word for ablution you already know is in 56
Badar
What about ? It's half the method of "ablution".
Now I understand where you come from. There's already the word which is used for the washing after intercourse (death, menustration, child birth and becoming a Muslim according to traditional Islam). The question would be What's exactly is "ghusl", and is it mentioned in the qur'aan or how to perform it? This calls for a separate thread (I do not know if this has already been discussed).