does one need, according to this ayah, wash the whole body after toilet.

[Wakas]

http//www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+research

As opposed to a haphazard game of blind man's bluff http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=14245.0

I will help you out though. From my own studies I have found all translations to be imperfect. One MUST always keep this in mind. In fact, I would go as far as to say that I find mistakes in 90% of the verses I study, most minor, some major however. It should be said however that sometmes the seemingly minor errors can have huge repercussions on meaning.

I strongly recommend the tools at www.StudyQuran.org

I have separated the steps out into lines making it easier to follow, and everything before the phrase in red involves water, everything after does not

You, you those who believed, if you started/got up to the affirmation/salat, so wash with water your faces, and your hands to the elbows, and rub/wipe with your heads and your feet to the two joints/ankle bones...
...and if you were impure/unclean , so be purified/cleaned..
...and if you were sick/diseased or on (a) journey or one of you came from toilet, or you touched the women so you did not find water, so wipe/rub your hands and face with dust good/pure dust from it...
God does not want to make/put on you strain/hardship, and but He wants to purify you and to complete (E) His blessing on you, so that you may thank/be grateful.

You, you those who believed, do not approach the affirmation/salat and you are intoxicated , until you know what you are saying, and nor impure/unclean, unless/except crossing/passing a road/way, until you wash yourselves...
...and if you were sick/diseased or on a journey, or any of you came from the toilet or you touched the women so you did not find water, so wipe your hands and face with pure/good dust...
...truly, that God was/is often forgiving/pardoning, forgiving.

Comparing the above two, the following is the only difference in terms of phrasing, so I will highlight below

...and if you were impure/unclean , so be purified/cleaned..

and nor impure/unclean, unless/except crossing/passing a road/way (i.e. travelling), until you wash yourselves...

So, the question is where is "whole body" mentioned and where is what you suggested in the other thread "These steps show if one goes to the toilet and washes ones bottom with water and hand, then does the rest of steps in wudu they will get the germs on your hands face head feet e.t.c" ?

To conclude, yes one may get germs all over them if they make up their own steps/order like you suggest rather than going by what AQ says.

[unknownuser]

http//www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+research

As opposed to a haphazard game of blind man's bluff http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=14245.0

I will help you out though. From my own studies I have found all translations to be imperfect. One MUST always keep this in mind. In fact, I would go as far as to say that I find mistakes in 90% of the verses I study, most minor, some major however. It should be said however that sometmes the seemingly minor errors can have huge repercussions on meaning.

I strongly recommend the tools at www.StudyQuran.org

I have separated the steps out into lines making it easier to follow, and everything before the phrase in red involves water, everything after does not

You, you those who believed, if you started/got up to the affirmation/salat, so wash with water your faces, and your hands to the elbows, and rub/wipe with your heads and your feet to the two joints/ankle bones...
...and if you were impure/unclean , so be purified/cleaned..
...and if you were sick/diseased or on (a) journey or one of you came from toilet, or you touched the women so you did not find water, so wipe/rub your hands and face with dust good/pure dust from it...
God does not want to make/put on you strain/hardship, and but He wants to purify you and to complete (E) His blessing on you, so that you may thank/be grateful.

You, you those who believed, do not approach the affirmation/salat and you are intoxicated , until you know what you are saying, and nor impure/unclean, unless/except crossing/passing a road/way, until you wash yourselves...
...and if you were sick/diseased or on a journey, or any of you came from the toilet or you touched the women so you did not find water, so wipe your hands and face with pure/good dust...
...truly, that God was/is often forgiving/pardoning, forgiving.

Comparing the above two, the following is the only difference in terms of phrasing, so I will highlight below

...and if you were impure/unclean , so be purified/cleaned..

and nor impure/unclean, unless/except crossing/passing a road/way (i.e. travelling), until you wash yourselves...

So, the question is where is "whole body" mentioned and where is what you suggested in the other thread "These steps show if one goes to the toilet and washes ones bottom with water and hand, then does the rest of steps in wudu they will get the germs on your hands face head feet e.t.c" ?

To conclude, yes one may get germs all over them if they make up their own steps/order like you suggest rather than going by what AQ says.

My aim was merely to show the inconsistency in the present translation although I do agree with your post , but the meaning of the word for water and Ghusl, I would use some other words found in lanes myself, they make more sense and get rid of the inconsistencies.

And the above translation where it says "whole body"was taken from Burhans merely to show an inconsistancy.

Although you are removing that by rephrasing it to "wash yourselves".

...and if you were sick/diseased or on (a) journey or one of you came from toilet, or you touched the women so you did not find water

here "so you did not find water" is a consequance of the four states listed , sickness journey toilet and touching.......

there isn't a wash or water at all i think, if you think there is then please explain the following ayah

And also;

Waallawi istaqamoo AAala alttareeqatilaasqaynahum maan ghadaqan

(And Allah's Message is) "If they (the Pagans) had (only) remained on the (right) Way, We should certainly have bestowed on them Rain in abundance.

Water/rain for the righteous!!!!!!!!!!

-[

[Wakas]

but the meaning of the word for water and Ghusl, I would use some other words found in lanes myself, they make more sense and get rid of the inconsistencies.

Perhaps the inconsistancies are only in your own head?

And the above translation where it says "whole body"was taken from Burhans merely to show an inconsistancy.

Really? Came across as more like simple concludes ABC from verse XYZ, not simple showing inconsistancy of verse XYZ. ;D

Although you are removing that by rephrasing it to "wash yourselves".

I am rephrasing it to what AQ says taghtasiloo means wash yourselves.

there isn't a wash or water at all i think, if you think there is then please explain the following ayah

And also;

Waallawi istaqamoo AAala alttareeqatilaasqaynahum maan ghadaqan

(And Allah's Message is) "If they (the Pagans) had (only) remained on the (right) Way, We should certainly have bestowed on them Rain in abundance.

Water/rain for the righteous!!!!!!!!!!

I use context and logic/reasoning to determine the meanings. When maan is used in conjunction with body parts and verbs such as "wash" I use my logic and favour the literal use of the term maan which is water. It also has a metaphorical meaning, which will be determined by context. See the translations of M.Asad or Shabbir Ahmed, others. Also, could be referring to the previous verse in which the people referenced are in fire.

If you dont think 56, 443 is translated correctly why dont you provide us all with your famous translations which pay little attention to roots, logic, cross-referencing and grammar?

[unknownuser]

Perhaps the inconsistancies are only in your own head?

Really? Came across as more like simple concludes ABC from verse XYZ, not simple showing inconsistancy of verse XYZ. ;D

I am rephrasing it to what AQ says taghtasiloo means wash yourselves.

I use context and logic/reasoning to determine the meanings. When maan is used in conjunction with body parts and verbs such as "wash" I use my logic and favour the literal use of the term maan which is water. It also has a metaphorical meaning, which will be determined by context. See the translations of M.Asad or Shabbir Ahmed, others. Also, could be referring to the previous verse in which the people referenced are in fire.

If you dont think 56, 443 is translated correctly why dont you provide us all with your famous translations which pay little attention to roots, logic, cross-referencing and grammar?

you haven't explained the verse;

Waallawi istaqamoo AAala alttareeqatilaasqaynahum maan ghadaqan

(And Allah's Message is) "If they (the Pagans) had (only) remained on the (right) Way, We should certainly have bestowed on them Rain in abundance.

I am sure people wouldn't mind RAIN FOR THE RIGHTEOUS, that is if "maan" AS YOU SAY IS WATER.

God Bless.

[Wakas]

I thought I did explain it

It also has a metaphorical meaning, which will be determined by context. See the translations of M.Asad or Shabbir Ahmed, others. Also, could be referring to the previous verse in which the people referenced are in fire.

[unknownuser]

I thought I did explain it

Assad says;

(16) THEN, that if they keep firmly to the path, We shall certainly shower them with blessings abundant, 12

What I said some time ago;

Waallawi istaqamoo AAala alttareeqatilaasqaynahum maan ghadaqan

(And Allah's Message is) "If they (the Pagans) had (only) remained on the (right) Way, We should certainly have bestowed on them Rain in abundance.

New Translation

And if they had stood upright we should surely have bestowed on them essence plenteous.

Thanks, i think Assad has got it, but is still sticking to the wudu translation made by the Hindus though, its pitty most people can't let go of previous beliefs - its like all people of different religions- people are stuck like glue.

peace

[Wakas]

Thanks, i think Assad has got it, but is still sticking to the wudu translation made by the Hindus though, its pitty most people can't let go of previous beliefs - its like all people of different religions- people are stuck like glue.

What is hilarious about this view of yours, is your translations throw cross-referencing in the bin, yet you use cross-referencing here to critique another's translation and think you have a point.

http//www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+pot
http//www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+kettle
http//www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+black

I agree with you though, some people are stuck in their ways, whether it be tradition/culture, patterns of behaviour, illogical thinking etc.

[unknownuser]

What is hilarious about this view of yours, is your translations throw cross-referencing in the bin, yet you use cross-referencing here to critique another's translation and think you have a point.

http//www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+pot
http//www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+kettle
http//www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+black

I agree with you though, some people are stuck in their ways, whether it be tradition/culture, patterns of behaviour, illogical thinking etc.

I think you got hold of the wrong end.

I was saying we need to use cross referencing, we shouldn't say Maan is water at 56 and blessings at another place rather the same procedure needs to be applied where ever Maan crops up.

peace

[Wakas]

No, I know exactly what you are saying.

Let's make it clear for all to see

I was saying we need to use cross referencing

If you are allegedly such a fan of cross referencing, can you please link me to any translation you have ever done and posted on this forum (that promoted your alternative view) that contained cross referencing?

I cant recall ever seeing you use cross referencing. Mind you, for a while now I haven't been reading most of your posts, so maybe you did sneak one in recently.

When I translate with an alternative, I usually like to give enough verification info (e.g. the root, occurrences) for the reader to study and possibly find holes in my view, because all the better for me, as then I can improve my view. Of course, some dont appreciate this subtle way of doing things.

[unknownuser]

No, I know exactly what you are saying.

Let's make it clear for all to see

If you are allegedly such a fan of cross referencing, can you please link me to any translation you have ever done and posted on this forum (that promoted your alternative view) that contained cross referencing?

I cant recall ever seeing you use cross referencing. Mind you, for a while now I haven't been reading most of your posts, so maybe you did sneak one in recently.

When I translate with an alternative, I usually like to give enough verification info (e.g. the root, occurrences) for the reader to study and possibly find holes in my view, because all the better for me, as then I can improve my view. Of course, some dont appreciate this subtle way of doing things.

Come on, why on earth will i try and prove what you are saying, where on earth is the gain in that, except may be waste an hour or so? There are far better things to do.

confused

peace

Thanks be to God.

[Wakas]

Come on, why on earth will i try and prove what you are saying, where on earth is the gain in that

The only potential gain is to salvage what credibility, if any, you have left.

In any case, I recommend playing blind man's bluff.

[unknownuser]

The only potential gain is to salvage what credibility, if any, you have left.

In any case, I recommend playing blind man's bluff.

Credibilty for you? now that is a laugh, bloody hell.

yeah

[unknownuser]

Okay so am i right in saying that a whole body wash isn't what is being said for after being in contact with women either as they both accur in this ayah, is that right???

-\

God Bless.

Thanks.

[Wakas]

Okay so am i right in saying that a whole body wash isn't what is being said for after being in contact with women either as they both accur in this ayah, is that right???

Blind man's bluff
Vs
http//www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+research (systematic investigation to establish facts)

Which method are you using?

Background
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=16400.0
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9597176.45

[unknownuser]

Blind man's bluff
Vs
http//www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+research (systematic investigation to establish facts)

Which method are you using?

Background
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=16400.0
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9597176.45

The quran says it?s easy to understand- I think.

All I am doing is applying the same rule to both coming from the toilet, or from the touching of women, as they both occur in this same ayah- I asume the same rule applies to both of them-surely.

If the same rule doesn't apply , please explain to everybody, why not!

if you can!

peace

[Wakas]

Oh, so you want me to answer your question yet you did not answer mine?

My question is simple, simple what method are you using?

Blind man's bluff (i.e. stumble and fumble about in the dark blind hoping to catch the answer)
OR
http//www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+research (systematic investigation to establish facts)

Once you show me your systematic reasoning and/or the possibilities you can see for these verses, then I will give you my view. If you dont, you are welcome to continue playing blind man's bluff with The Quran.

If you are wondering why I am taking this approach with you, simply read the threads I linked to.

There are two types of hard-headed people in this world

1. those whom you tell that their head is not harder than the cement and they consider, reflect, research and take on board your info and proceed appropriately/conservatively/cautiously/forethoughtfully.
2. those who wont believe it till their head hits the cement.

[unknownuser]

Oh, so you want me to answer your question yet you did not answer mine?

My question is simple, simple what method are you using?

Blind man's bluff (i.e. stumble and fumble about in the dark blind hoping to catch the answer)
OR
http//www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+research (systematic investigation to establish facts)

Once you show me your systematic reasoning and/or the possibilities you can see for these verses, then I will give you my view. If you dont, you are welcome to continue playing blind man's bluff with The Quran.

If you are wondering why I am taking this approach with you, simply read the threads I linked to.

There are two types of hard-headed people in this world

1. those whom you tell that their head is not harder than the cement and they consider, reflect, research and take on board your info and proceed appropriately/conservatively/cautiously/forethoughtfully.
2. those who wont believe it till their head hits the cement.

Well Br,

having studied to masters- what method do you think i would use -stumble and fumble about in the dark blind hoping to catch the answer?

rotfl

Thanks

wow