48:24 correct timeline...
-
Well Mazhar that has certainly brought me closer to understanding 4824, thanks so much! Wakas, it certainly is a curiosity. Doesn't it actually read makkata though?
-
mkk could mean 'crowding' in this verse, which is a Classical Arabic meaning.
"...in the midst of crowding..."
This also perfectly explains the next verse.
Sorry Wakas, there is even no remote possibility of that meanings.
The word is and yet is with fataha for reason of being a definite noun.
-
peace Mazhar,
I am aware of that, but I am also aware of this
http//groups.yahoo.com/group/quranists/message/9
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9598276.msg201108#msg201108According to tajweez and the the phenomeon of idghaam
(assimilation), Shahru-ramadaana can equal shahrun + ramadaanan This
validates the understanding of 'a month during a time of constant or
intense heat' And a shaddah could be inserted over the the ra to
show this understanding. The traditional understanding is also still
valid, although it may not be more logical, and is certainly not
more universal.It is merely a gossip, without any substance.
He has conveniently forgotten that it is and, grammatically, is in genitive state, but apparently remains in accusative state being proper noun. And when any noun is made accusative an alif gets added to it. And he has also conveniently forgotten that "shahru" is indefinite and here it is definite only because of construct noun Ramazana, and is , the subject of the nominal sentence.
-
Peace,
Since I was the originator of this theory I will offer my logic for it. However, I must add that i have since rescinded my opinion on this, as I have come to terms with a purely lunar pre-Islamic calendar that includes Ramadan and a separate solar calendar that was used in pre-Islamic Arabia based on the constellations.
My premise first started off on the fact that the text of the different readings of the Quran that we have do not consistently reflect the tajweed employed when they are recited. With that first established I began to study the phrase shahru ramadaana. My first idea was that the raa in ramadaana can be read with a shaddah (a tajweed prounciation that is not consistently reflected in text). Reading this with a shaddah would automatically imply that shahru was not just shahru in an idaafah construction but rather shahrun with idghaam. This idghaam consisted of the assimilation of the noon into the raa' of ramadaan. Again these specifics are based on the premise that the rules of tajweed are not accurately represented in Quranic texts, and that this was a reading that most recitors did not take because of their traditional reading traditions.
As for ramadaana, there are plenty of places in the Quran where the rule of adding an alif for accusative or having alifs where alifs do not usually go are broken. That is because the traditional texts as we have them reflect the development of Arabic writing conventions and are not the end product of writing conventions that were agreed upon after the Quran began to be written down.
Anyone who pays attention to the written texts of the Quran and doesn't just assume that they follow all of the writing conventions that are taught will see that the Quran shows us different stages of wiriting conventions as Arabic was being developed and standardized as a written language.These are the reasons behind the stance that I took before about shahru ramadaana. Again, I have rejected my previous understanding of the phrase based on having come across evidence that the pre-islamic calendar for hajj and ramadan was PURELY LUNAR.
Godbless,
Anwar -
peace Anwar,
I am still not clear in your position in what is being discussed here.
Quite simply, can mkk in 4824 theoretically mean "crowding"?
If you need to give two answers, i.e.
"under the current tashkeel/vocalisation....... yes/no"
"if we removed the tashkeel/vocalisation...... then yes/no"etc.
-
Peace,
I don't remember 'crowding' being one of the meanings of that root. I remember, destruction and sucking/dryness. i don't remember crowding. It's possible that makkata can mean makkatan. IT would be a rare and unprecedented reading but it DOES work grammatically. This is not far fetched. But it can also be the name Makkah, for the area.
My position on the above is that I now see ramadaan as the name of a lunar month that was part of a lunar calendar that existed even during pre-islamic times. I don't see any real proof that the lunar calendar was ever a luni-solar calendar. So I accept the traditional understanding of Ramadan. However the grammatical issues I brought up are valid. I just don't see the need to dissect it in this way.
Godbless,
Anwar -
peace,
Thanks.
This is what you wrote
= Miim-Kaf-Kaf = Sucking, Sucking up, Absorbing, drinking up, Destruction/Destroying, diminishing, diminution/failing; failure, to cast, to throw away, to discard, to straighten/tighten or impede/restrict, to beseech/ask/accept, crowding, competition (izdihaam).
http//www.quranists.com/files/makkah.pdf
-
peace,
Thanks.
This is what you wrote
= Miim-Kaf-Kaf = Sucking, Sucking up, Absorbing, drinking up, Destruction/Destroying, diminishing, diminution/failing; failure, to cast, to throw away, to discard, to straighten/tighten or impede/restrict, to beseech/ask/accept, crowding, competition (izdihaam).
http//www.quranists.com/files/makkah.pdf
Like meaning "crowd" also means same.
-
My first idea was that the raa in ramadaana can be read with a shaddah (a tajweed prounciation that is not consistently reflected in text). Reading this with a shaddah would automatically imply that shahru was not just shahru in an idaafah construction but rather shahrun with idghaam. This idghaam consisted of the assimilation of the noon into the raa' of ramadaan. Again these specifics are based on the premise that the rules of tajweed are not accurately represented in Quranic texts, and that this was a reading that most recitors did not take because of their traditional reading traditions.
Peace
This presumption was even unsound. Firstly the "tanween" could not be presumed on the first noun in construct state. Secondly "tanween" could not be presumed because of "single fatha" on Ramzana. You could presume "tanween" and shadda if Ramzan had "Dhumma tanween" whereby you could take it as adjectival phrase.
