Peacemaking and Peacemakers in the Great Reading

ths

Peace to all,

I must admit that I've become more confused than ever before.

First of all, Ayman's argument

FORM II

He surrendered, became subservient, allegiant

FORM IV

He made safe;

Now Mazhar's argument

FORM II

He made safe; he greeted.

FORM IV

He surrendered, became subservient, allegiant

Now Ayman is right when he says means to surrender your weapons in modern Arabic.
This is unequivocally true.

Thus, it seems like Form 2 has the connotations of surrender and submission.

However, Mazhar pointed to some very useful verses

843

2427

2461

Now Herbman mentioned that 3alaa changes the meaning, and this is true.
Still, what is curious is that the word for 'greeting' or 'salutation' in 2427 and 2461 are both in Form 2

So why is "greeting" in Form 2, something that invokes meanings of submission?

Now as for 843, Asad, Shakir, Arberry, Pickthall, and Yusuf Ali ALL translate it as "God saved you"

There is an argument there that the verse does not mention what exactly God sallamah. It just says "walaakinna allaha sallama"

The next verse reads

When God showed you them in your eyes as few, when you encountered, and made you few in their eyes, that God might determine a matter that was done; and unto God all matters are returned.

Thus, the phrase could mean "but God submitted "

So let us look at Herbman's list more indepth

sallama vb. (2)
perf. act. 2233, 843
impf. act. 465, 2427
impv. 2461, 3356
n.vb. 465, 3322, 3356
pcple. pass. f. 271, 492, 492

aslama vb. (4)
perf. act. 2112, 2131, 320, 320, 320, 383, 4125, 544, 614, 2744, 37103, 4914, 4917, 7214
impf. act. 671, 1681, 3122, 4066, 4816
impv. 2131, 2234, 3954
n.vb. 319, 385, 53, 6125, 974, 3922, 4917, 617
pcple. act. 2128, 2128, 2132, 2133, 2136, 352, 364, 367, 380, 384, 3102, 5111, 6163, 7126, 1072, 1084, 1090, 1114, 12101, 152, 1689, 16102, 21108, 2278, 2731, 2738, 2742, 2781, 2791, 2853, 2946, 3053, 3335, 3335, 3912, 4133, 4369, 4615, 5136, 665, 6835, 7214

sallama vb. (2)

perf. act. 2233, 843

843 - see explanation above.

2233

Here ALL the main translators have translated sallamtum as "surrendered" or "given", referring either to the child being given to the foster parents, or to the money owed to the foster parents for taking in the child.

It could mean "provided you have made peace with the situation you are in", however, this does not make sense because of the "idha" qualifier.
It says "there is no fault on you IF you sallamtum what you have given equitably.

Therefore, according to my interpretation, this example is according to Ayman's argument.

impf. act. 465, 2427

465

I agree with the standard interpretation of this verse yusallimuu tasleeman means submission.

So this also agrees with Ayman's argument.

2427

We addressed this at the top. It definitely means to greet, but it uses form 2 and has the particle 3alaa after the verb.

impv. 2461, 3356

2461

Again, definitely refers to greeting, but also has 3alaa after it.

3356

There may be disagreement about this, but I believe it refers to submission instead of greeting.

n.vb. 465, 3322, 3356

465

Same as above.

3322

All of the main translators translate this as submission.

If we use Ayman's argument here, then this shows without a doubt that there is a heavy connotation of submission within Islam.

I'm inclined to agree here with Mazhar's argument, purely out of ideological reasons, but cannot prove the argument either way.

pcple. pass. f. 271, 492, 492

271

Translated as "without blemish" or some other similar definition.

Therefore the standard interpretation is the same as Mazhar's.

However, it could very well mean "submission" or "surrender", as in "it is a cow, not broken-in, to plough the earth and water the crops in submission"

492

Definitely means to surrender or submit or yield.

Therefore works according to Ayman's argument

492

This is translated as "a believing slave".

This does not make sense. Surely a believing slave would be fadiyatun muslimatun, and not musallamatun?

Therefore I have to interpret this verse as the freeing of a submitted slave, or surrendered slave.

aslama vb. (4)

I shall pick some verses out at random to test.

perf. act. 2112, 2131, 320, 320, 320, 383, 4125, 544, 614, 2744, 37103, 4914, 4917, 7214

Every single one of these verses use aslama as "aslama wajhahu lillaah" or to mean that someone has accepted Islam.

Since this is the very question we want to answer, it is impossible to make any argument on what they mean here. We need instead to confirm or deny that all Form 4 verbs do not imply surrendering so that we can claim that "aslama wajhahu" and other such occurrences definitely do or do not imply surrender or submission.

impf. act. 671, 1681, 3122, 4066, 4816

4816

Can either mean "you fight them or they surrender"
or "you fight them and they make peace"

Cannot say which is more correct at the moment.

impv. 2131, 2234, 3954

All occurrences are in the imperative form "Aslim"

n.vb. 319, 385, 53, 6125, 974, 3922, 4917, 617

All occurrences are of "al-Islam"

pcple. act. 2128, 2128, 2132, 2133, 2136, 352, 364, 367, 380, 384, 3102, 5111, 6163, 7126, 1072, 1084, 1090, 1114, 12101, 152, 1689, 16102, 21108, 2278, 2731, 2738, 2742, 2781, 2791, 2853, 2946, 3053, 3335, 3335, 3912, 4133, 4369, 4615, 5136, 665, 6835, 7214

All occurrences are of "Muslim" or its subsidiaries "Muslimoon" or "Muslimeen"

So to summarize what I've discovered.

The Form 2 verbs several times have the connotation of submission or surrendering without a doubt.
There are some verses that could not be proven without a doubt, and in which either interpretation could fit.
But importantly, no verses can be said beyond a doubt to have connotations of peace making or safety.

Therefore I'm inclined to believe that Form 2 verbs should always be interpreted with connotations of submission/surrender.

The Form 4 verbs always refer to Islam or Muslims. Therefore it is difficult to make any argument in favor of either stance.

However, we also know that the Form 4 verbs are derived from Salaam, which unequivocally means peace.

salam (peace) ?> aslama (to make peace) ?> muslim (peacemaker)

So to summarize, the perfect example of this confusion amongst the translators is 465 and 4816

465 But no, by the Lord, they can have no (real) Faith, until they make thee judge in all disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against Thy decisions, but submit with the fullest submission. (yusallimuu tasleeman)

4816 you fight them or they surrender (yuslimuun)

This is clearly a Form 4 verb, yuslimuun (1 L). Why does it then mean the EXACT same thing as yusallimuu (2 L's) ??

The answer is that it clearly does not mean the same thing. Anyone studying the Quran will know how precise the language is.

We also know that the Form 4 verbs are derived from Salaam (peace), and thus it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that the Form 4 verbs all mean to "make peace". All references to Islam or Muslims are in Form 4.
The translation should thus read you fight them or they make peace

Coincidentally, I got into this debate last week with a non-Arabic speaking friend, and he argued that I was wrong based on the overwhelming amount of sources online saying that Islam = submission.

He referred to this quote from wikipedia

"The word islam is a verbal noun originating from the triliteral root s-l-m, and is derived from the Arabic verb ??slama, which means "to give up, to desert, to surrender (to God).""

Someone should probably submit a new article to wikipedia, or atleast a paragraph after this stating that aslama itself comes from salaam.

EDIT

Could I ask someone to create a table like Herbman's form table, but with the root of SLM?
I would do it myself but don't consider myself to be knowledgeable enough, although I might try it when I have more time.

Raaajah

ths

Peace to all,

I must admit that I've become more confused than ever before.

..because Quran is not a book of grammar! not a game of noun/pronoun

In my opinion.

ths

Actually I think it is, and I think that by understanding the grammar first, your understanding of the Quran will deepen.

I've started to create a verb form table for SLM, and I'm ashamed to say that despite growing up in the Middle East, I can't even complete it.
What's more pathetic is that I sent it to an Egyptian friend who enjoys poetry, so his Arabic is better than mine, and he said he didn't know either....so that says something about the standard of education in the Middle East these days. I think only Syrians get taught Arabic properly these days.

Either way, here it is. I hope that Ayman or someone else competent enough can correct it and complete it.

I suspect several may be wrong. And form 9 is just bewildering so I won't even attempt it. I also skipped the first 2 from Form 1.

Also, isn't Form 1 fa3aal --> salaam ? This would make peacemaking "salamah", but the example of husna, salih, jaram seems correct. So which is it? Aslama cannot appear 2 times in the verb table.

If anyone can correct/complete/find this in an arabic grammar book, then please feel free. I think it's a useful tool to have around and should settle this entire debate.

Raaajah

Actually I think it is, and I think that by understanding the grammar first, your understanding of the Quran will deepen.

If it is so, then what about the claim of it being easiest book to understand, if a person grown in the area where the native language is language of Quran feels difficulty in comprehending it, a person doing poetry in the native language shows his ignorance in understanding then may be it is the time to rethink, isn't it? What about those who do not know a single word of Arabic? Why get out of the shackles of Mullah and at the same time become prisoners of ayman or any one else for that purpose?
Symbol ayman (Modernist) = Symbol Mullah (traditionalist)

ths

If it is so, then what about the claim of it being easiest book to understand

Uh, I don't think that is a valid claim. No one has said it is the easiest book to understand, only that everyone will draw their own understanding of it. Whether that understanding is valid or not is another question. There are layers of meaning to the Quran. Some people study it their entire lives and still keep learning. Others only achieve the most superficial understanding.

What about those who do not know a single word of Arabic? Why get out of the shackles of Mullah and at the same time become prisoners of ayman or any one else for that purpose?
Symbol ayman (Modernist) = Symbol Mullah (traditionalist)

Those who do not know a single word of Arabic will not understand a single word of the Quran, unless they rely on translations, which of course were written by people who DO understand Arabic.

I am not a prisoner of Ayman. The Arabic language isn't a random hodgepodge of gibberish. It is a precise and pristine mathematical language, and it operates under those laws.

You cannot understand the world until you study physics and mathematics to understand the laws of nature.
You cannot understand the Quran until you study the grammar and understand the laws of Arabic.

This argument is moot. Telling someone Arabic grammar is not important to the understanding of the Quran is pretty ludicrous in my opinion.

Mazhar

Form-I Perfect

Plu Dual Sing

Imperfect Indicative

Imperfect Subjunctive

Imperfect Jussive

Long time back I had posted a thread giving link which provides on line verb conjugation, quite reliable.

http//acon.baykal.be/index.php?r3=%D9%85&r2=%D9%84&r1=%D8%B3&type=I&pvowel=a&ivowel=a

ths

Thank you Mazhar! This is extremely helpful!

I'll tinker with it for a bit and get back with the results

EDIT Is there a way to find the Ism al-maf3oul or the masdar? I can't seem to find them

Mazhar

ths,

Patterns.

You may find here

http//www.elementaryarabic.com/MeasureI.html

ayman

Peace THS

I am not a prisoner of Ayman. The Arabic language isn't a random hodgepodge of gibberish. It is a precise and pristine mathematical language, and it operates under those laws.
You cannot understand the world until you study physics and mathematics to understand the laws of nature.
You cannot understand the Quran until you study the grammar and understand the laws of Arabic.
This argument is moot. Telling someone Arabic grammar is not important to the understanding of the Quran is pretty ludicrous in my opinion.

I agree with everyting except the "mathematical" thing. It is impossible for the Arabic letters to have been used as numbers since the Arabic language wasn't used in teaching and therefore didn't have a systematic letter order. Conventional letter orders which simply have to be learnt by rote, are typical of school-taught literacy. Because the order is transmitted systematically and universally in formal teaching, it can then be used as a numbering system by giving the letters numerical values as in Greek and Hebrew. On the other hand, Arabic was an oral vernacular language that was not used in literacy. In fact, we have several pre-Islamic examples of Arabian (Musnad) alphabet abecedaries in each of which the letters have been arranged in a different order, none of them a conventional Abjad. In each, the letters have been grouped according to the similarities which the particular writer perceived in their shapes.

Arabic has 28 letters to Hebrew?s 22. What we notice is that the Arabic letters that don?t have an equivalent in the Hebrew alphabet have been relegated to the end of the numerals. This observation proves an artificial phonetic alignment with the Hebrew alphabet in Islamic times after the fact of Arabic becoming the religious lingua franca.

At any rate, back to our subject. As you know, my understanding is very simply that "muslim" means peacemaker and "islam" means "peacemaking". This is the meaning according to the Arabic vocabulary and morphology for the forms "muf3il" and "if3al". This is also the logical meaning that fits in all occurrences of those words in the great reading and is in line with the entire message of the great reading and our purpose since the god placed us as leaders on earth as evidenced by the objection of the controllers (?malaika?). Moreover, this concept of peacemakers/peacemaking was well known to the people of the book prior to the great reading.

As Mazhar kindly pointed, you can use this excellent tool to get the forms of any Arabic root

http//acon.baykal.be/

I would suggest that you try different words to see the relation between the Masdar form IV "IF3AL" (ISLAM) and the name of the Masdar which is of the form "Fa3AL" (SaLAM). Try words like - ? which all mean the making of success, plants, good, ... and by the same token ISLAM would be making of peace ie, peacemaking.

Peace and all best wishes,

Ayman

Raaajah

Uh, I don't think that is a valid claim. No one has said it is the easiest book to understand, only that everyone will draw their own understanding of it. Whether that understanding is valid or not is another question. There are layers of meaning to the Quran. Some people study it their entire lives and still keep learning. Others only achieve the most superficial understanding.

Well this was a claim of many Quranists right here on this board, but as each Quranist has his own view on Quran, we cannot club all the Quranists under one roof.
Oh! if that is so How the Arabs of that time were able to understand that layers?

Once there was a seminar held on a famous poets book of poetry, the speakers were analyzing the poetry with different angles, and each was claiming that this is what is actually said in his poetry, but the poet was telling his friend I never even thought of what they are assuming.

You can spend your whole life studying the poetry of Iqbal or any other great Philosopher or writer, each time you will study his wring or poetry a new angle will be disclosed.

Those who do not know a single word of Arabic will not understand a single word of the Quran, unless they rely on translations, which of course were written by people who DO understand Arabic

That is what I am trying to tell you! Ayman has the time skills, and Knowledge may be you too can spend hours and hours searching those senseless tables. People here are worried about what they will eat next time, how there kids can go to school, how can they save their house from rain, But they still believe in ONE ALLAH.
I don't know about Philosophers but I have seen people starving but saying this is from Allah a exam.
To rely on translations of others is same to rely on Grammar of Ayman, do you find any difference?

You cannot understand the world until you study physics and mathematics to understand the laws of nature.
You cannot understand the Quran until you study the grammar and understand the laws of Arabic.

Physics and Mathematics are Human try to understand Nature and Laws of nature, other wise the laws are there, neither Budha nor Muhammad peace is upon him neither Musa (AS) studied Physics or Mathematics.
The use of Grammar to understand Quran is a later invention.
Muhammad peace is upon him was not a Grammarian.

http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/054.%20Al%20Qamar/54.17.gif

http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/054.%20Al%20Qamar/54.15a.gif

Now if we need Grammarians and Tables to understand Quran, that Allah has made easy for Us, then it is something else and not Quran.

Mazhar

Once there was a seminar held on a famous poets book of poetry, the speakers were analyzing the poetry with different angles, and each was claiming that this is what is actually said in his poetry, but the poet was telling his friend I never even thought of what they are assuming.

You can spend your whole life studying the poetry of Iqbal or any other great Philosopher or writer, each time you will study his wring or poetry a new angle will be disclosed.

A poet has no right to say what he intended to say once it is with public. People are at liberty to assume and ascribe anything they like about a poem. Poetry is not something meant for believing.

The point has been emphasized

http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/069.%20Al%20Haqata/69.40a.gif
that undoubtedly that/Grand Qur'aan is certainly the Oral and written word/narration by the Exalted Messenger;

http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/069.%20Al%20Haqata/69.41.gif
and the Grand Qur'aan is not the Oral and written word/narration of a poet.
Little is that which you people accept/believe/acknowledge.

Since it is not the word of a poet, therefore, nothing can be attributed to it, except that which its word convey in simple and straight forward manner.

Raaajah

Mazhar Sahib

The point has been emphasized
http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/069.%20Al%20Haqata/69.40a.gif

that undoubtedly that/Grand Qur'aan is certainly the Oral and written word/narration by the Exalted Messenger;

No doubt it is! only if they believed.

Rajah

Oh! if that is so, How the Arabs of that time were able to understand that layers?

through the Exalted Messenger and not from Grammar!

Mazhar

Rajah

Quote
Oh! if that is so, How the Arabs of that time were able to understand that layers?

through the Exalted Messenger and not from Grammar!

Grammer is never the issue with the natives of any language. Grammer is needed only for non natives.

Raaajah

Mazhar sahib

Grammer is never the issue with the natives of any language. Grammer is needed only for non natives.

Please allow me to strongly disagree with your above statement. If you read the post of ths it is quite obvious how badly they are in need of Grammar despite being natives to understand Quran.

Technically speaking the above statement has a flaw too.

Mazhar

Mazhar sahib
Please allow me to strongly disagree with your above statement. If you read the post of ths it is quite obvious how badly they are in need of Grammar despite being natives to understand Quran.

Technically speaking the above statement has a flaw too.

However, this is the accepted principle. A non native cannot understand the speech even if has all the vacabalary of that language in his mind memorized from a dictionary. "ths" does not claim to be an Arab, he merely said grown up in Middle East.

A simple example

One may know the individual meanings of all the three words. But he can not understand what has been stated by the speaker unless he knows about the role of case endings which will enable him to identify as to who is the subject of verb and who is the object of verb. And this is grammer.

Understanding Qur'aan and believing in Qur'aan are two different things. Abu Jahl was otherwise very intelligent person fully appreciative of delicacies of the language of Qur'aan. He did not believe, it does not mean that he did not understand Qur'aan.

Moreover, understanding the language and perceiving the thought relating to hidden realities contained therein are also two different things, which will be understood according to the level of information of the reader.

Raaajah

Mazhar sahib

Understanding Qur'aan and believing in Qur'aan are two different things. Abu Jahl was otherwise very intelligent person fully appreciative of delicacies of the language of Qur'aan. He did not believe, it does not mean that he did not understand Qur'aan.

Agreed!

Mazhar sahib

Moreover, understanding the language and perceiving the thought relating to hidden realities contained therein are also two different things, which will be understood according to the level of information of the reader.

Agreed!

Mazhar sahib

However, this is the accepted principle. A non native cannot understand the speech even if has all the vacabalary of that language in his mind memorized from a dictionary. "ths" does not claim to be an Arab, he merely said grown up in Middle East.

"ths" mentioned a friend who is Arabic poet in his post.

I have a word in front of me the most important one
"Allah" What does Grammar says about this word? How can Grammar help us in understanding this word, for example is this word Common noun or Proper noun? or for example how can Grammar help us to understand the following
Ma Malakat Aymanukum, that will really help.

Mazhar

Rhanks, Raaajah sahib,

I have a word in front of me the most important one
"Allah" What does Grammar says about this word? How can Grammar help us in understanding this word, for example is this word Common noun or Proper noun? or for example how can Grammar help us to understand the following
Ma Malakat Aymanukum, that will really help.

is and grammer has no role. Grammer will come into play when it is used in a sentence.

In its first occurrence it is part of Apodosis clause. is a Relative pronoun and being in apposition it is in accusative state there; it mostly refers to non rational-abstract objects; is a perfect verb, third person, singular; feminine. is a possessive phrase where both noun and possessive pronoun are plural. The first noun is the subject of preceding verb. "Kum" includes men and women of the society-group of people being addressed.

is firm resolve, oath, which also results undertaking of an obligation, liability and responsibility.
A financially poor man does not have such "hands" which possess "slave girl" or "maid servant"----see 425.

Raaajah

Mazhar sahib

In its first occurrence it is part of Apodosis clause. is a Relative pronoun and being in apposition it is in accusative state there; it mostly refers to non rational-abstract objects; is a perfect verb, third person, singular; feminine. is a possessive phrase where both noun and possessive pronoun are plural. The first noun is the subject of preceding verb. "Kum" includes men and women of the society-group of people being addressed.

is firm resolve, oath, which also results undertaking of an obligation, liability and responsibility.
A financially poor man does not have such "hands" which possess "slave girl" or "maid servant"----see 425.

Well plural but masculine
The word aymnuhum here is N ? nominative masculine plural noun
PRON ? 3rd person masculine plural possessive pronoun

any way
Now what I meant to say was that see for example your translation of 2306

except seeking their mates or from the right which they possessed . In consequence indeed they are not the blamed ones.

How did Grammar alone helped you to arrive at this translation? or how can Grammar help any one to arrive at this conclusion/translation. Hope I have clarified what I am trying to ask.

Mazhar Sahib

One may know the individual meanings of all the three words. But he can not understand what has been stated by the speaker unless he knows about the role of case endings which will enable him to identify as to who is the subject of verb and who is the object of verb. And this is grammer.

In the above case from grammar we come to know who is subject of verb and what is the object of verb, but how do you come to know what is that the MEN possess their right over?

is and grammer has no role. Grammer will come into play when it is used in a sentence.

Using the word Allah as a common noun or proper noun is Grammar, may be I am wrong please correct me if I am.

Mazhar

Using the word Allah as a common noun or proper noun is Grammar, may be I am wrong please correct me if I am.

A proper noun shall always remain a proper noun. And so is a common noun. Its visible or estimated state, i.e. case endings determine the role when it is an element of a sentence.

There is a detailed classification of women for the purposes of constituting a new family unit.

One sub group in the classification of women is

It includes women who are under the protection and command of persons who are not the family of those women, maid servants.

The other women that may happen to be present without their families are those believing women, already in marriage bond with non-believing men, who migrated to believing society. They are now under the protection and are obligation of the believing society, not to be allowed to be repatriated to their respective non believing husbands.

herbman

A proper noun shall always remain a proper noun. And so is a common noun. Its visible or estimated state, i.e. case endings determine the role when it is an element of a sentence.

There is a detailed classification of women for the purposes of constituting a new family unit.

One sub group in the classification of women is

It includes women who are under the protection and command of persons who are not the family of those women, maid servants.

The other women that may happen to be present without their families are those believing women, already in marriage bond with non-believing men, who migrated to believing society. They are now under the protection and are obligation of the believing society, not to be allowed to be repatriated to their respective non believing husbands.

Salam,

Please consider revising your knowledge about MMA, you seem to confine "MMA" as to be only a subcategory of women, when AlQuran consider "MMA" to be possessed either by men and women as per 2431.

ps why are you debating about MMA in a this thread? There are many already open thread about this subjetc.

Regards