Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Users
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Free Minds Forum Icon
  1. Home
  2. General Issues / Questions
  3. Questions/Comments on the Quran
  4. Could this be the valley of BAKKAH?

Could this be the valley of BAKKAH?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Questions/Comments on the Quran
55 Posts 11 Posters 1.7k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    Mazhar
    wrote on last edited by
    #46

    The point of discussion was this

    You can use the word even when you place something up high, like on your top shelf.--Anwar

    This perception was declared incorrect by Mazhar

    This is not the correct perception. Arabic Roots mirror all physical realities regarding the concept/perception infolded therein. will never reflect a thought of distancing away something upwardly. The perception infolded in the Root is to lay down, place a thing at a certain location of reach with the result that it becomes conspicous and evident. And where it is placed conspicuously that location/place becomes , scene, spot, location, position. With this background passive voice is also used in the meanings "to appoint"-see dictionary compiled by Abdul Manan Omar.

    Anwar referred Lisan.

    Mazhar stated

    Lisaan was referred to by you. Its main and basic observation about the word is that it is contra of elevation. And also check Lane Vol-VIII you will find everywhere that it is contra of elevation.

    Anwar responds

    The words 'main and basic observation' is your opinion and interjection. It is ONE definition of the word(not the main and basic observation), and it does not cancel out the other meanings.

    Here's some other pertinent quotations from lisanul-'arab that follow your three worder above

    He reproduces the page available at http//www.baheth.info/all.jsp?term=

    And he deleted the Head Entry which shows the basic meanings of the Root.

    ( &#1576
    .

    And in all entries, he will not find support for his opinion which was declared incorrect,
    .

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • M Offline
      M Offline
      Mazhar
      wrote on last edited by
      #47

      Those interested to know and verify the meanings of they may consult Page 386-387 of Vol-8 of Lane Lexicon, also available on Wakas Root Project on line, wherein the entries enumerated in Lisaan are included.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • P Offline
        P Offline
        progod
        wrote on last edited by
        #48

        Peace,

        Mazhar,

        I did not delete the first entry. I cited it from what you said and then added many of the other entries. You may not find some of the meanings in Lane's lexicon but I have not reviewed lane's entry for this. Anyway, like I said you can use wada3 even when you place something up high. If you put something on your head you use the word 'wada3'. When you put a roof on a house you use the word wada3. And you can both raise a roof and put a roof on a house. You don't see the ridiculousness of this concocted contradiction of yours?

        Godbless,
        Anwar

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • M Offline
          M Offline
          Mazhar
          wrote on last edited by
          #49

          Peace,

          Mazhar,

          I did not delete the first entry. I cited it from what you said and then added many of the other entries. You may not find some of the meanings in Lane's lexicon but I have not reviewed lane's entry for this. Anyway, like I said you can use wada3 even when you place something up high. If you put something on your head you use the word 'wada3'. When you put a roof on a house you use the word wada3. And you can both raise a roof and put a roof on a house. You don't see the ridiculousness of this concocted contradiction of yours?

          Godbless,
          Anwar

          But from which entry of Lisan, you have put the page, you are assuming the aforesaid perception?

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • M Offline
            M Offline
            Mazhar
            wrote on last edited by
            #50

            In reverse relationship

            ( &#1576
            .
            .

            ( &#1577
            . .
            .
            .
            . .
            .
            .
            .

            ( &#1577

            . .

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • P Offline
              P Offline
              progod
              wrote on last edited by
              #51

              Peace,

              Mazhar it is simple logic and plain usage. When you put something on your head you raise it above your head and then set it down on your head. I guess my issue is that you guys are oversimplying rfa3 (to raise) and wada3(to put down) into an excessive black and white issue. You are acting like the two cannot be apart of the same action in some way. Putting something on your head for the most part involves you raising it up first and then, yes, doing the opposite of the raising by putting it down (even if only by a centimeter) onto your head. The same process can go on with a house. You first begin building it by putting the first bricks of the foundation DOWN onto the earth. Then you put more bricks down onto each other, effectively raising (rafa3) the level of the house by laying the bricks down (wada3) onto each other. SIGH!!! This is so simple and so kindergarten logic. I feel like I am talking to kindergarteners by having to explain this. But it seems that folks don't really think about these simple things and hence make assanine assumptions about them. Oh Humanity! We are indeed lost if these people are our leaders. God, give them guidance! Help them develop their powers of reason and thought! And keep them from assuming, and then making judgements, about things that they do not understand! By the way, this is very frustrating. I think I may have to stop participating in the conversation soon. For those who would take that as a victory, so be it. You can have your insane victory, and I'll just keep my sanity.

              Godbless,
              Anwar

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • WakasW Offline
                WakasW Offline
                Wakas
                wrote on last edited by
                #52

                peace Anwar,

                You have a somewhat unusual way of writing your posts, e.g. grouping responses/discussions together.

                Anyways, I recommend re-reading what I wrote.

                All information is correct to the best of my knowledge only and thus should not be taken as a fact. One should always seek knowledge and verify for themselves when possible: 17:36, 20:114, 35:28, 49:6, 58:11.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • M Offline
                  M Offline
                  Mazhar
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #53

                  The same process can go on with a house. You first begin building it by putting the first bricks of the foundation DOWN onto the earth. Then you put more bricks down onto each other, effectively raising (rafa3) the level of the house by laying the bricks down (wada3) onto each other. SIGH!!! This is so simple and so kindergarten logic.

                  It is not logic, but kindergarten simplicity and play.

                  The continuous process of raising a building by placing bricks over and over does not mean that could signify raising-elevating. It is but childish thought.

                  And yes kindergarten do not understand that and both reflect relative locative relationship between two things.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • WakasW Offline
                    WakasW Offline
                    Wakas
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #54

                    More proof

                    2436 In houses that God has allowed to be raised (RF3) and be mentioned/remembered in them/it His name. He is glorified therein morning and evening.

                    All information is correct to the best of my knowledge only and thus should not be taken as a fact. One should always seek knowledge and verify for themselves when possible: 17:36, 20:114, 35:28, 49:6, 58:11.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • M Offline
                      M Offline
                      Mazhar
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #55

                      More proof

                      2436 In houses that God has allowed to be raised (RF3) and be mentioned/remembered in them/it His name. He is glorified therein morning and evening.

                      Has any relationship with ? If so, how?

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Don't have an account? Register

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Users