Support for a Middle Prayer?

mmkhan

I had also always viewed Salawat as blessings. Heres my take on it,trying to stay in context, altho not sure if i had missed out on other verses that contained salawat.

2157 They are those on whom salawatun(blessings) from Allah, and Mercy, and they are the ones that receive guidance.

999 And of the wandering Arabs there is he who believeth in Allah and the Last Day, and taketh that which he expendeth and wasalawati (blessings of) the messenger as acceptable offerings in the sight of Allah. Lo! verily it is an acceptable offering for them. Allah will bring them into His mercy. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

232 Those who humble themselves in their prayers(salatihim);
23,9 And who (strictly) guard salawathim( their blessings bestowed)

2238 Guard strictly your alsalawati (the blessings bestowed), and the best prayer; and stand before Allah in a devout (frame of mind).

Salaam brother,

Please look at the Arabic text to see the difference.

The above three are similar but 2238 is different

Do you see the difference brother? There is "AL" in the beginning and "Saad" has a tashdeed over it.

May Allah guide us all to His true path pr
Mohammed M. Khan

jeffry

Salaam to u too brother MMkhan,

Thank you for pointing that out. I know nothing of arabic grammar, language, tashdeed etc etc, but trying to learn as i go along.
The way i understood it is like, for example, the word educate. ( i am not saying salawat means educate) and the "Al" denoting a "the".
So in my ignorance, i understood it as...for eg educated , education , educating, (Al)the education.

Again, tq so much for pointing it out. Only Allah can give u best of rewards. I will look up on the grammar/language/tashdeed etc.

Peace

mmkhan

Thank you for pointing that out. I know nothing of arabic grammar, language, tashdeed etc etc, but trying to learn as i go along.
The way i understood it is like, for example, the word educate. ( i am not saying salawat means educate) and the "Al" denoting a "the".
So in my ignorance, i understood it as...for eg educated , education , educating, (Al)the education.

Again, tq so much for pointing it out. Only Allah can give u best of rewards. I will look up on the grammar/language/tashdeed etc.

Salaam brother,

You are welcome )

Yes, you are right "Al" simply means "The" and the difference that I have shown you does not require grammar or language knowledge to understand, you can just take a look at Arabic words and compare them, you will find the difference, inshaAllah.

Tashdeed is nothing but a small "w" on a letter.

May Allah increase us all in knowledge and guide us all to His true path pr
Mohammed M. Khan

Eikonoklastes

Peace Kevin,

Brother Yousef made a good point.

2238 Preserve the contact prayers, and the middle contact prayer, and stand devoutly for God.
2239 But if you are in a state of worry, then you may do so while walking or riding. If you become secure, then remember God as He has taught you what you did not know.

FACT #1 The Middle prayer is not a fixed prayer. It can be done anytime between the dawn contact prayer and the evening prayer. So Preserve the contact prayers and the middle prayer cannot be redundant since the dawn and evening prayers are fixed prayers and the middle prayer isnt.

This is also further verified when King Solomon missed a contact prayer (this is correctly implied since Solomon was so worried that he got rid of his horses!!!)

3830 To David We granted Solomon. What an excellent and obedient servant.
3831 When, during dusk, (bil-ashiyi) well trained horses were displayed before him.
(Since all the followers of the two daily prayer theory believe in a dawn and dusk prayer let us be consistent for all the roots for ayn shn ww )
3832 He said, "I enjoyed the good of materials more than I enjoyed remembering my Lord, until it became totally dark!" (It is still evening or dusk)
3833 "Send them back." He then rubbed their legs and necks. ( This verse can be used to imply that Solomon missed a contact prayer)

Hence the prayer that was missed by Solomon was a prayer before the Dusk prayer.

Again the middle prayer is NOT A FIXED PRAYER. So Sura 2238 isn't redundant. All it is saying is to Maintain the contact prayers (which are fixed prayers dawn and dusk) AND a middle prayer (which is not a fixed prayer).

The reason it not being a fixed prayer is because this prayer is in working hours of the day. (the time which we are usually preoccupied)
2239 But if you are in a state of worry, then you may do so while walking or riding. If you become secure, then remember God as He has taught you what you did not know.

I'm not sure if I entirely understand what you mean by "fixed". Do you mean like a pinpoint certain time verses a range? What makes you believe the dawn and dusk prayers aren't also assigned ranges? The words fajr (dawn) and isha (dusk) indicate the twilight times at the 2 ends of the day, which are occurrences that happen within a range of time. You don't look at a sunrise or a sunset and the sun just jumps the horizon in an instant and it's over.

When 2458, 11114 and 1778 are examined together, we see that it is clearly a range of time given for the 2 daily salat (I explained it with more detail in my first response, but I'll briefly show it again here)

2458 is simply where the names of the salat are given. Salat al-fajr, and salat al-isha. This is agreed upon by all parties that it means dawn and dusk, which obviously occur within a range of time.

11114 You shall hold the contact prayer at both ends of the day and the near part of the night. The good deeds take away the bad. This is a reminder for those who remember.

"Waaqimi alssalata tarafayialnnahari wazulafan mina allayli inna ..."
Obviously the "wa" holds the property of referring to the multiple ideas prior, so it's referring to both salats performed at both ends. Take note of the "both ends" by the way, which is dual in this case since it's referring to the 2 edges close to the night. The "near part of the night" shows that it's closer to the night, as the night has just finished/is just approaching (fajr/isha respectively). Again the night doesn't just appear like the flick of an off-switch. It happens in a range of time.

1778 You shall hold the contact prayer at the setting of the sun, until the darkness of the night; and the Quran at dawn, the Quran at dawn has been witnessed.

"Aqimi alssalatalidulooki alshshamsi ila ghasaqi allayli ..."
li = Preposition meaning "just after"
dulooki = "rubbing of"
alshamsi = "the sun" (in context this must be the apparent rubbing on the horizon as according to the Quranic edges of the day it's sunrise/sunset)
ila = "until"
ghasaqi = "darkness of"
allayli = "the night"

Both salat al-fajr and salat al-isha are given ranges to perform them in. If there were a middle prayer, by the admitting of those who abide by it, there is a range also. It would only be a very long range, but a range nonetheless. Does anyone believe one must pray the entire duration of the "middle" range? Of course not. This shows that there isn't any differentiating of the prayers, and "Preserve the contact prayers, and the middle contact prayer..." is still redundant and illogical. Also, there is no indication of the "middle prayer" being special, nor that the salawati are within a day (they are all the salat in a person's life), thus creating the errors I outlined in my last post. If the reasoning for singling out the prayer was in fear of missing it, wouldn't it make more sense to single out the dawn and dusk prayer since the ranges are shorter than that of the lengthy alleged middle prayer range?

With this said, where do those who abide by this middle prayer find their timing for it? If it's just in the middle of the dawn and dusk prayer, why do you choose the middle of the day? There is also a middle of the 2 salat in the night. And in fact, within the 3-salat theory community, there is a split as a group of people perform this prayer in the night instead of the day.

++

I haven't scrutinized this situation with Solomon as much as I'd like to, but when examining the context and logic of the verses and their words, I don't see it referring to a missed contact prayer at all. The explanation is a bit lengthy, but I'll try to outline the main reasons.

Here is the translation you used

3830 To David We granted Solomon. What an excellent and obedient servant.
3831 When, during dusk, well trained horses were displayed before him.
3832 He said, "I enjoyed the good of materials more than I enjoyed remembering my Lord, until it became totally dark!"
3833 "Send them back." He then rubbed their legs and necks.

Here is, in my opinion, a slightly better translation (lengthy bracketed additions removed)

3830 AND UNTO DAVID We granted Solomon, how excellent a servant! Behold, he would always turn unto Us
3831 when, towards the close of day, nobly-bred, swift-footed steeds were brought before him
3832 he would say, Verily, I have come to love the love of all that is good because I bear my Sustainer in mind!" until they were hidden by the veil ,
3833 Bring them back unto me!"- and would stroke their legs and their necks.

The only reason this is attributed to a missed prayer, is because of the appearance of the "dusk" and "totally dark" in certain translations making it seem like a prayer time is being referred to. But it's quite a leap to assume so, and when seen in context, it's hard to say it's even talking about the night. Let's settle that 3831 says "dusk". That's fine, it appears to be dusk/evening or something like that anyway. What about this "totally dark" translation in 3832? We know first of all that "ghasaq" means the complete dark, and "layl" means night. None of which is apparent there. In fact, the words used there are "tawarat bialhijabi" which means "hidden in/by the veil". This is apparent in the second translation and makes sense as he says "Bring them back unto me!" - "rudduha" means "bring them back/return them" which is evident since he can now pet them once returned. Why would he say "Bring them back!"? This means they were away from him, "hidden by the veil" most likely of distance or just out of his sight. Even if one argues it's the veil of night, there is no indication he missed a prayer. In the first translation, it's not indicated what even happened to the horses to make him call for the horses to be returned. You say in regards to the first translation, "this is correctly implied since Solomon was so worried that he got rid of his horses!!!", so he got rid of them, then rubbed their legs and necks? This obviously doesn't make sense.

Even if you insist on the first translation though, nothing indicates that this was the time of some middle prayer. In light of the ranges I outlined in the above point and prior, salat al-isha is to be held just after the rubbing of the sun until the darkness of the night (lidulooki alshshamsi ila ghasaqi allayli). Note that it specifically says the DARKNESS OF THE NIGHT. Not just the night, as dusk is somewhat night, but the DARK night (when there is totally no more light) is when the range for salat al-isha ends.

Now if we look at Solomon's exclamation in the first translation

3832 He said, "I enjoyed the good of materials more than I enjoyed remembering my Lord, until it became totally dark!"

Why did he feel the need to say "totally" dark? At this total darkness, the time for salat al-isha has ended. If one believes this is referring to some middle prayer, then that would mean that the ranges overlap as both "middle" and isha prayers would have to end at the darkness of the night! This confusion obviously cannot and does not exist. Furthermore, I would find it hard to believe that if there was a middle prayer with such a long range, a God-conscious individual like Solomon hadn't thought about his salat for all those hours. It makes more sense that one would miss salat al-isha as it's a short range that ends when total darkness arrives.

But this is only if you entertain the former interpretation. I think it's now safe to say it has error in it.

The Assembly prayer is another sign in the Quran that points to a middle prayer during the working hours of the day.

629 O you who acknowledge, if the contact prayer is called to on the day of assembly, then you shall hasten towards the remembrance of God, and cease all selling. This is better for you, if you only knew.

6210 Then, once the contact prayer is complete, you shall disperse through the land and seek God's provisions, and remember God frequently, so that you may succeed.

Nothing implies a daily middle prayer at all here. This is a big topic on it's own, but here are some quick things to note

This yawmialjumuAAati means Day of THE Assembly/Congregation, as evident by the "al". What is this day that it is not just any day, but the Day of THE Assembly/Congregation? It's still up for debate as far as I am concerned, but at this point an official day in which the most Muslims assemble and congregate, is for the pilgrimage. Many also believe that it is just whenever a congregation is held.

The problem here is assuming that business is ONLY held between salat al-fajr and salat al-isha, and that's it. This is obviously not true. During the pilgrimage, business is being conducted at almost all hours, before and after dawn, as well as before and after dusk. This would lead me to believe that when the call for both salat al-fajr and salat al-isha respectively is called, business is still being conducted, and the instruction is that those doing so must hasten towards the prayers, and cease the business until it is over.

This works in line with salat al-fajr and salat al-isha, and does not imply a middle prayer. And if you take this chapter to refer to ANY time in which an official gathering is held (marriage, etc.), the same obviously still applies as not everyone just congregates between fajr and isha.

There are also other verses in the Quran that indicate a middle prayer which have already been posted on this forum topic and many others. One sign that I found out a few weeks ago was that there are only three verses in the entire Quran that says to face towards the Restricted Sanctuary (2144, 2149 and 2150) . Could this be a coincidence???

While I don't completely dismiss the numerology aspect of the Quran, I don't take it this seriously to present as proof for something that should be a lot more certain. I have seen many people use similar things to prove 2, 4, 5 salat and a plethora of other aspects and it isn't really substantial. If you stare at the clouds long enough, you'll begin to see faces and animals, etc..

Since this too will open up another can of worms, I suggest putting it aside and dealing with the tangible proofs, if you don't mind.

Basically Eikon you and the followers of the two contact prayer theory only base your arguments on Linguistics while mines and others are based on Linguistics AND the knowledge of the previous scriptures which show that the Jews have been praying three daily prayers for centuries!!! This is the religion of Abraham! This is the same religion which was taught to Isaac, Jacob and the Twelve patriarchs. Three contact prayers is not a new practice unlike the two daily pray theory that suddenly just sprout out of nowhere!!!!

In the end both opposing sides can argue about who has the correct Linguistics but in the end the question should be asked who has the MORE PROOF to support there claim. In this case, the three daily pray practice trumps all other theories.

Like I said before - quality over quantity. I don't care who has more proof, I don't see it as a point system. It's about what is quality and in line with the Quran. And in terms of linguistics, the opposing arguments are hardly even as the many errors I pointed out still exist after one realizes this alleged middle prayer is not in any way shown to be special... or to even exist.

We both agreed prior that things must be seen in light of the Quran first, and then other sources can begin to help support via interpretation, etc. So why can't we stick to the Quranic arguments for now?

The debate about the authenticity of the previous scriptures can go on forever, hence why I was trying to bring the debate down to the completely tangible aspects involving the Quran, so that it doesn't contain too many tangents.

In terms of history, there is also a lot of proof that 2 salats have been around since the beginning as well; Wakas and Ayman have both presented many sources on the forum. These evidences were mostly around the time of Islam spreading, and yet it was corrupted, imagine if we try to get evidence from Moses or Jesus' era, there is chance for so much more corruption to have occurred. And indeed we know about such events as the Council of Nicea. I don't believe the modern Torah and Bible are 100% infallible, therefore using them is fruitless in this debate, especially when we both agree that the Quran comes first. The original recordings have not been preserved, and therefore it is prone to being misinterpreted in many areas. Imagine if we didn't have the Arabic of our Quran and read an English verse like 1779 from a certain interpretation (And rise from thy sleep and pray during part of the night , as a free offering from thee, and thy Sustainer may well raise thee to a glorious station) in conjunction with 7626 or something - people would argue until the end of time that Quran followers must wake up in the middle of the night and do salat. But we see the original text and differentiate between salat and dua and nafil and so on. This cannot be done as surely with previous texts. In fact many who advocate 5 daily prayers find their "proof" of 5 prayers in previous books as well.

I don't believe the noble and righteous man who Allah sought to be a prophet, Lot, prostitued (Gen. 191- nor had drunken incestuous sex with his daughters (Gen. 1930-3, or that followers of Jesus can drink deadly poison and survive (Mark 1617-1, or that degrading females (the references are way too plentiful and obvious on this one - from saving their hymen blood rags for proof of virginity, to not being allowed to ask questions in church, to being the cause of all sin and thus being punished with childbirth) or that circumcision or death penalties or rape are or ever were parts of Allah's decree. Or that sprinkling your house seven times with animal blood protects it from certain plagues (Lev. 1449-52), etc. Anybody who wants to believe these atrocious things, can do so. But I would hope that you can at least see why I personally believe these are obvious additions of humankind. The prior books were corrupted until the Quran, the message for ALL HUMANKIND and not just Israelites, was sent down and the original decree was preserved.

If you claim the previous books are 100% infallible, you uphold MANY MANY things that conflict with the Quran, and therefore by your own words, are in sin. If you do not claim they are 100% infallible, then they are hardly proof and you fall susceptible to being misguided when you pick and choose, much like many of the hadithers are. Take your pick.

Either way you are welcome to believe them and take them as support for your beliefs, but they hold next to no weight in the argument in the eyes of someone who follows the Quran alone. You say just because the previous books said something all through out history, the Quran must be interpreted with that. So then should we interpret verses like 434 to mean beating wives? Why not? Degrading females has been a part of religion for centuries! Circumcision has been a part of religion for centuries! Death penalties have been a part of religion for centuries! If you endorse these, you conflict with the Quran. And you do endorse them if you uphold the modern Torah and Bible to be the complete words of Allah.

You can continue to try and prove the authenticity of these past books, but it won't really prove anything if you cannot first establish sound evidence from the Quran - and the issue is obviously still in debate. In light of 548, the Quran confirms that there is some truth in previous books, but that the Quran corrects and supersedes where there is error due to human corruption. Be open to the fact that this may very well be one of those situations.

May peace be with you.

Eikonoklastes

Peace,

This is somewhat besides the point, but that verse about Solomon actually brought to light something interesting. I actually may not accept Ayn-Shiin-Waw to mean dusk all the time. Maybe it does in that verse, I'm not sure it makes a huge difference at the moment. But I was just going through all the examples in the Quran with similar formations, and many seem a bit out of place or some are oddly paired with different words for the "morning" part and other references that too have roots with different meanings.

Interesting to note the other definitions given in dictionaries that are never utilized. It seems everyone just accepted it meant dusk, and maybe it only does. But some like "weak sighted/blind", "forsake", "withdraw" tend to shed entirely different meanings when used in some verses. I wish I knew enough Arabic and had the time to investigate all the grammar, etc.

Just throwing it out there. Never know who is reading and investigates and finds something most completely missed.

May Allah guide us all.

KDC501

Brother Ekion,

To you is your way and to me is my way. This is why I am always hesitant to participate in Salat discussions. Everyone believes that there take on Salat is the correct one. I have seen hundreds of discussions on Salat on this website. Your questions have already be answered countless of times. I believe the only practical way to settle all of our disputes is weigh the proofs; and as far as I'm concerned the "three salat prayer" theory, beats all other theories by a mile. Anyone that says otherwise is lying to themselves. It is a practice that has been done by most of the prophets (From Abraham to Jesus) before Muhammad. Abraham did it, Issac did it, Jacob did it , the Children of Israel did it, Moses did it, Mary (who was related to Zechariah a high priest in Jerusalem) did it, Jesus (who was born into a Jewish Society) did it. The proof is there. And it outweighs all other theories. As an ex-Christian I will follow what I am knowledgeable of and not something that is completely foreign to me.

Peace,

Kevin.

Eikonoklastes

Brother Ekion,

To you is your way and to me is my way. This is why I am always hesitant to participate in Salat discussions. Everyone believes that there take on Salat is the correct one. I have seen hundreds of discussions on Salat on this website. Your questions have already be answered countless of times. I believe the only practical way to settle all of our disputes is weigh the proofs; and as far as I'm concerned the "three salat prayer" theory, beats all other theories by a mile. Anyone that says otherwise is lying to themselves. It is a practice that has been done by most of the prophets (From Abraham to Jesus) before Muhammad. Abraham did it, Issac did it, Jacob did it , the Children of Israel did it, Moses did it, Mary (who was related to Zechariah a high priest in Jerusalem) did it, Jesus (who was born into a Jewish Society) did it. The proof is there. And it outweighs all other theories. As an ex-Christian I will follow what I am knowledgeable of and not something that is completely foreign to me.

Peace,

Kevin.

Peace Kevin,

I can say your issues have been answered countless times as well, as I've seen similar discussions exhausted. But we all believe what we believe for certain reasons. For me I believe that if someone is living on an island and is isolated from outside religion, and I wanted to give them the complete and preserved religion of Abraham, I would hand them a Quran and not hesitate that it would be sufficient for their salvation (in the hereafter, not on the island). No other books needed. And the Quran's sufficiency in itself is what makes the points that utilize it only much more valid than incorporating other sources containing random fragments of truth.

Your claim that prior prophets did it, is just based on the reports. You were not a witness to them doing this, you rely on the sources claiming they did this, and I've shown these sources to be corrupt and conflicting with the Quran. It's much like the hadith claiming Muhammad did certain things that we know conflict with the Quran. Nothing has protected or is protecting these sources from corruption.

In the end, to you is your system and to me is mine. It's not the biggest of issues anyway, as the main idea here is monotheism. But debating is always good to flesh out ideas and test your faith. I appreciate one who debates more than one who just merely spreads their view but doesn't participate in or welcome opposing arguments.

May peace be with you.

KDC501

Peace Kevin,

I can say your issues have been answered countless times as well, as I've seen similar discussions exhausted. But we all believe what we believe for certain reasons. For me I believe that if someone is living on an island and is isolated from outside religion, and I wanted to give them the complete and preserved religion of Abraham, I would hand them a Quran and not hesitate that it would be sufficient for their salvation (in the hereafter, not on the island). No other books needed. And the Quran's sufficiency in itself is what makes the points that utilize it only much more valid than incorporating other sources containing random fragments of truth.

Your claim that prior prophets did it, is just based on the reports. You were not a witness to them doing this, you rely on the sources claiming they did this, and I've shown these sources to be corrupt and conflicting with the Quran. It's much like the hadith claiming Muhammad did certain things that we know conflict with the Quran. Nothing has protected or is protecting these sources from corruption.

In the end, to you is your system and to me is mine. It's not the biggest of issues anyway, as the main idea here is monotheism. But debating is always good to flesh out ideas and test your faith. I appreciate one who debates more than one who just merely spreads their view but doesn't participate in or welcome opposing arguments.

May peace be with you.

Not all of the beliefs in the Bible are corrupted. This is shown countless of times in the Quran!

370 O people of the book, why do you reject God's signs while you are bearing witness?

371 O people of the book, why do you dress the truth with falsehood and conceal the truth while you know?

447 O you who have received the book(Jews and the Christians), acknowledge what We have sent down authenticating what is with you, before We cast down faces and turn them on their backs or curse them as the people of the Sabbath were cursed. God's will is always done.

2947 Similarly, We have sent down to you the Book. Thus, those whom We have given the book will acknowledge it.(Jews and the Christians) Also, some of your people will acknowledge it. The only ones who mock Our signs are the ingrates.

If you believe that every part of the Bible is false then it is quite clear to me that you don?t read the Quran carefully. How can any group of people bear witness to something they do not know???? confused

Even God told Muhammad that if he was unsure of anything that was sent down to ask the people of book!

1094 If you are in doubt regarding what We have sent down to you, then ask those who have been studying the book from before you. The truth has come to you from your Lord, so do not be of those who doubt.

If there wasn't any truth in the Bible then why would God ask the Jews and the Christians to judge by was sent them. Doesn't this imply that the Bible has the truth in it. Common sense Eikon.

543 How can they make you their judge when they have the Torah, containing God's judgment; then they turn away after that. They do not acknowledge.

544 We have sent down the Torah, in it is guidance and a light; the prophets who have peacefully surrendered judged with it for those who are Jews, as well as the Rabbis, and the Priests, for what they were entrusted of God's book, and they were witness over it. So do not revere the people but revere Me; and do not purchase with My signs a cheap price. Whoever does not judge with what God has sent down, then these are the ingrates.

547 Let the people of the Injeel judge with what God has sent down in it. Whoever does not judge by what God has sent down, then these are the vile ones.

FACT #1 The Jews are a group of people who had over 28 prophets and the Arabs only had one! What person in there right mind could insinuate that these people don?t know the correct number of prays after so many prophets !!! It is asinine!

If I interpret 2238 to be a sign of the middle pray how I can be wrong! No one in there right mind can deny the history of the people of the book because if you do that then it implies that you don't trust God when he told Muhammad ?ask those who have been studying the book from before you? !

The only way for us to know what is correct from what is false is by the Quran. The Quran authenticates the previous scripture not the previous scripture the Quran. Think of the Quran as the sifter and the Bible the flour. Anything that is not in the Quran are assumptions of the Bible but everything else are facts!!! I see three daily prayers in the Quran and you don?t. To you is your way and to me is mine. If you want to believe in a theory that has zero historical basis (based on the previous scriptures) then that is your own lost.

Peace,

Kevin

GODsubmitter

Is the number of salaat prayers 5 or 3

excellent text on that

http//realquran.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2is-the-number-of-salaat-prayers-5-or-3&catid=6religious-questions&Itemid=3

youssef4342

Peace Everyone peace
As Layth has stated in the begining of the discussion, that the prayer on the day of Gathering (yowm Al juma3a), is the biggest affirmation of a middle prayer because

This prayer is a concievable Daily prayer, since it is A prayer Which happen to fall on a Special day, a day of gathering (i.e It's not a prayer of gathering, but a prayer ON the day of gathering)
God Almighty clearly tells us that we should DROP ALL BUISNESS in 629
God Almighty tells us that after we finish, we CAN PRESUME OUR BUISNESS and seek his bounty in 6210
God ALmighty Clearly defines the daylight as a timiming to seek from his bounty in 2873

This Can only mean that This - daily prayer - has to be in the daylight hours (drop/presume buisness), and that it's timing (daylight hours) is the timing for the prayer when the day of gathering (youm al-jum3a) takes place.

~ May His Most Blessed, Dominating, Supreme, High Majesty Resolve our disputes ~
~ Most Blessed is His Supreme, High Majesty YHWH, the Initiator, the Ruler, the Sustainer, the Dominator of the Worlds ~

Eikonoklastes

Peace Kevin,

Not all of the beliefs in the Bible are corrupted. This is shown countless of times in the Quran!

If you believe that every part of the Bible is false then it is quite clear to me that you dont read the Quran carefully. How can any group of people bear witness to something they do not know???? confused

If there wasn't any truth in the Bible then why would God ask the Jews and the Christians to judge by was sent them. Doesn't this imply that the Bible has the truth in it. Common sense Eikon.

I'm not sure why you are trying to prove this to me... I never said every part of the Bible is false. ??? What I was showing you was that not every part is true, thus meaning it is corrupt, thus meaning only what is in line with the Quran is true. THUS, meaning if you can't establish something first in the Quran, using "support" from these corrupt sources is useless. In other words, according to your analogy, you are beginning to sift the flour without fixing the hole in your sifter first, and claiming that you have purely sifted flour.

FACT #1 The Jews are a group of people who had over 28 prophets and the Arabs only had one! What person in there right mind could insinuate that these people dont know the correct number of prays after so many prophets !!! It is asinine!

I don't look at it like that, like Jew prophets VS Arab prophet, therefore the quantity rules. I believe the Jews had prophets who brought the message to the Israelites which at the time was pure, but it was not guarded from corruption over time which is evident from the content in it and from documented events such as the Council of Nicea, etc.. The final revelation was to the world, and was through an Arab prophet, and Allah's message through him to the whole world was preserved. Just because the OT and NT is corrupt, doesn't mean ALL the prophets didn't know something or were wrong. The REPORTS are corrupted. If we believe the Quran is the final preserved word, we can assume ALL prophets were in line with it's teachings and things like Lot prostituting his virgin daughters to be raped by an angry mob never happened.

If I interpret 2238 to be a sign of the middle pray how I can be wrong! No one in there right mind can deny the history of the people of the book because if you do that then it implies that you don't trust God when he told Muhammad ask those who have been studying the book from before you !

You are wrong because it does not make sense in line with the Quran. What are you going to take, the Quran, or uncertain accounts of history?

2238 Preserve the contact prayers, and the middle contact prayer, and stand devoutly for God.

Brother Kevin, just read that line. Maybe inquire with a professional writer, or a professor of language. This is not my opinion, it's not a question of subjectivity... it is a FLAWED statement. There is no denying this! It is so very erroneous in so many ways! If you notice, many translators noted at least the redundancy and tried to sneak in an "especially" or "certainly" to fix that mistake. But it's not in the Arabic, nor is there any proof that this "middle prayer" is some special/different salat. When you use 'wusta' to mean 'middle', you have so many flaws existing which I outlined many times previously. When you use it's other definition, all your flaws within that sentence are gone, the context makes clear sense with the following verse, and 2458, 11114 and 1778 all come to be consistent with 2 daily salat, without any doubt of their timing. Please consider this.

482 Do they not ponder on The Quran? If it was from any other than God they would have found in it much variance/inconsistency/contradiction.

And it seems you too acknowledge that there is corruption in the OT and NT. How do YOU explain your trust in Allah when He told Muhammad to ask those who have been studying before? It's clear that it was not to determine the fine things like this, but just that it is the word from the Abrahamic God, that He communicated with us prior. There are still prophecy fulfillments and accounts of past prophets that are in line with the Quran from past books. That's the proof. But it is clear that in conjunction with verses like 548, there is some remaining truth Muhammad was to judge between, but there is some falsehood as well. Also, the Quran will be doing some superseding. This means there are changes in certain things as well.

Another small note is that the OT and NT at the time of Muhammad was quite different than the ones we look at today. Many different events have happened in regards to the ruling of these scriptures and what translations are to be used. The King James version came after many processes of change in which books and translations were thrown out and added, and is yet the dominant one today.

The only way for us to know what is correct from what is false is by the Quran. The Quran authenticates the previous scripture not the previous scripture the Quran. Think of the Quran as the sifter and the Bible the flour. Anything that is not in the Quran are assumptions of the Bible but everything else are facts!!! I see three daily prayers in the Quran and you dont. To you is your way and to me is mine. If you want to believe in a theory that has zero historical basis (based on the previous scriptures) then that is your own lost.

This is a great analogy! But like I said before, you claim your theory holds more weight because of all the history (flour) you have. But is it all valid sifted flour if it has been going through a sifter with a hole? We must fix the sifter first (make complete sense within the Quran alone first), THEN we can sift the flour (bring up whatever proof we have that is in harmony with the Quran). Just because you have all this historical proof, doesn't mean anything if it's resting on a botched translation.

Kevin, here is an example of your methodology when it is applied to another situation

In Genesis 191-8, Isaiah 1316, Zechariah 141-2, Deuteronomy 2013-14 and 2 Samuel 12 11-14 there are examples of rape being allowed/decreed. Rape tends to involve some sort of beating... either way, it's worse.

Now, when we come to this part of the infamous women-beating verse

434 ... As for those women from whom you fear disloyalty, then you shall advise them, abandon them in the bedchamber, and idriboo them; if they obey you, then do not seek a way over them; God is High, Great.

In the article on Quran434.com, the verse is thoroughly analyzed and it is without doubt that the word means something along the lines of "cite". Now I'm not sure what your views are on this, but I would assume you don't believe it means "beat". I don't know if you've read the proof on Quran434.com, but it is all dealing with the Quran only. Linguistics, context, logic.

To infer idriboo means "beat/hit/strike", goes against linguistics, context, logic. BUT, degrading women has been a part of history in the previous books for years!!! According to you, degrading women is the religion of Abraham, it's been done for years before Muhammad with OT and NT as proof! It was accepted by Lot, David and many other prophets!

Quran434.com just uses linguistics, but to degrade women uses linguistics AND history! It has SO MUCH more proof as for centuries it was being done! We must use the OT/NT to interpret "idriboo" to mean "beat/hit/strike" because it has a whole foundation of history! And "idriboo" as "cite" ignores this history, and is just a linguistic approach.

Do you see my point, brother? The marvelous attribute of the Quran is that when it was revealed, it went AGAINST so much (alleged) history! It didn't matter what was being done or not, the Quran was the latest and complete and preserved revelation from Allah the Almighty, and if anything didn't come in line with it, it was not to be upheld by a Muslim!

I understand where you are coming from. Maybe 3 salat never existed, was somehow wrongly documented or who knows what could have happened in over 1000 years. Or maybe it very much existed and it was what all prophets before Muhammad did. But the fact is that whatever Allah wants to do, He does, and has stated His laws to all of humankind in the Quran with completion and finality. If only 2 salat can be shown, then so it must be! Who knows what Allah's plan is, perhaps He changed it and is testing who follows the Quran over conjecture. In fact, many have asked on these forums, "Why didn't Allah use a better word than "idriboo" if He knew it would cause this confusion?" Or what about the verse with cutting off thieves' hands? Or why would He use "wusta" when He knows it would cause this debate? I firmly believe these are tests to see who obeys the true preserved religion of Abraham. It's not unusual for tests like this to exist.

When you use "middle" for "wusta" in 2238, UNDENIABLE FLAWS exist within the Quran, even if it is in line with all of history. This is a clear sign of a test. Who will follow conjecture and what their forefathers upheld and ignore the clear signs of the Quran?

May peace be with you.

KDC501

Peace Kevin,

2238 Preserve the contact prayers, and the middle contact prayer, and stand devoutly for God.

Brother Kevin, just read that line. Maybe inquire with a professional writer, or a professor of language. This is not my opinion, it's not a question of subjectivity... it is a FLAWED statement. There is no denying this! It is so very erroneous in so many ways! If you notice, many translators noted at least the redundancy and tried to sneak in an "especially" or "certainly" to fix that mistake. But it's not in the Arabic, nor is there any proof that this "middle prayer" is some special/different salat. When you use 'wusta' to mean 'middle', you have so many flaws existing which I outlined many times previously. When you use it's other definition, all your flaws within that sentence are gone, the context makes clear sense with the following verse, and 2458, 11114 and 1778 all come to be consistent with 2 daily salat, without any doubt of their timing. Please consider this.

No it is not a flawed statement. lol. You want to talk about flawed statements! Look at something you failed to see. This is your translation.

2238 BE EVER mindful of prayers, and of praying in the most excellent way; and stand before God in devout obedience

Transliteration Hafithoo AAala alssalawati wa alssalati alwusta waqoomoo lillahi qaniteena

How is "and of praying in the most excellent way" come from Al Salat al Wusta! Al Salat is a noun not a verb. You can't translate al salat as "praying " but as "prayer"(a noun) !!! The word "al" (which means THE) is the biggest clue that salat is a noun and not a verb!!! (al salat al wusta). In my view you can't translate al salat as "praying" a verb, but "prayer" A NOUN!

Nothing is wrong with this translation...

2238 Preserve the contact prayers, and the middle contact prayer, and stand devoutly for God. It is consistent.

Your's is not consistent. Your translation uses verbs when you're suppose to be using nouns!!! Mines uses nouns and is consistent.

Check here if you don't believe me http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=2&verse=238

You shouldn't be so quick to judge translations when your own translation has inconsistencies.

Till you can prove to me that 2238 has a verb before waalssalati alwusta then your 2238 translation is completely destroyed Your translation is using verbs that doesn't exist!

And again there is no redundancy since the quran could be doing one of the two.

Placing emphasis on the "middle prayer" . Words like especially and particularly are adverbs that were probably not available at the time

or

Showing that the middle prayer is not a fixed prayer (since it can be done late and early afternoon) unlike the dawn and dusk prayer which is done at fixed times.

The two daily prayer theory is now officially crushed due to bad translation! . lol. Using nouns instead of verbs is not a sin Eikon but it sure makes a whole lot of difference in an idea won't you say.lol. All I see are people twisting the Quran and translation for there own benefit. I'm not saying that you are doing that but I am 100% sure that they are others who know what they are doing is wrong and choose not to revert. I would not bother to answer the rest of your post since i have already told you countless of times that anything that is not in the Quran but in the Bible are assumptions.

Peace,

Kevin.

Eikonoklastes

Peace Kevin,

No it is not a flawed statement. lol. You want to talk about flawed statements! Look at something you failed to see. This is your translation.

2238 BE EVER mindful of prayers, and of praying in the most excellent way; and stand before God in devout obedience

Transliteration Hafithoo AAala alssalawati wa alssalati alwusta waqoomoo lillahi qaniteena

How is "and of praying in the most excellent way" come from Al Salat al Wusta! Al Salat is a noun not a verb. You can't translate al salat as "praying " but as "prayer"(a noun) !!! The word "al" (which means THE) is the biggest clue that salat is a noun and not a verb!!! (al salat al wusta). In my view you can't translate al salat as "praying" a verb, but "prayer" A NOUN!

Nothing is wrong with this translation...

2238 Preserve the contact prayers, and the middle contact prayer, and stand devoutly for God. It is consistent.

Your's is not consistent. Your translation uses verbs when you're suppose to be using nouns!!! Mines uses nouns and is consistent.

Check here if you don't believe me http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=2&verse=238

You shouldn't be so quick to judge translations when your own translation has inconsistencies.

Till you can prove to me that 2238 has a verb before waalssalati alwusta then your 2238 translation is completely destroyed Your translation is using verbs that doesn't exist!

...Are you serious? This is not a point at all lol. It's not "MY" translation versus "YOUR" translation, word for word literal battle. It's the idea behind what the message is conveying. I thought we both knew this.

The translation I used, like many others, included slight variations to help explain the point away. That's why many of these "literal" translations fail and even resort to adding words themselves, because they don't always consider the context and logic and the fact that Arabic =/= English in formation of sentences. For example the Solomon one you provided before. It's not uncommon, it's to help the reader understand. I don't believe it's always the right thing to do, but that doesn't mean anything is "crushed".

From Corpus Quran, "wal-alati" is a noun, and "l-wus'" is an adjective. In English, the adjective tends to come before the noun, that's the reason why some translators input words to help clear up the understanding because they either have to switch it around from the Arabic, or try to make it work in the same order.

Guard on the prayers, and the prayer the balanced/best way... if you really want to force it that way. But Arabic works differently meaning the English has to compensate. Hence when you read the most literal translations on Corpus Quran, it doesn't always make sense. Why? Because Arabic doesn't work the same way as English! If you look at the translation you used, I could say, "The adjective came after! It should be 'the prayer the middle way!'". How do we do the prayer the middle way? The "middle prayer" is a noun because it's talking about THE middle prayer! You don't even use the adjective! The reason why translators try their best to clarify this message is because they realize how redundant and illogical "the middle prayer" would be there. I didn't think I would have to spell that out. I didn't own the translation, I was just putting it forth as a better one. And like I mentioned before, this most likely isn't even referring to contact prayers, and is referring to the commitments you hold towards your family/spouse (read entire chapter), therefore showing that you can't guard your commitments to your family in the "middle" (adjective) way.

In fact, if you want to see how the translation on Corpus Quran corners itself, W-S-T as an adjective is used in 2143

We made you a community of the middle way so that you will be like witnesses over the mankind

Kevin, do you believe we are a community of the middle way (or, "the middle community&quot? I hope not. In fact, the translation you used, uses this same W-S-T adjective to mean "balanced" for 2143, despite using it as "middle" in 2238!

2143 As such, We have made you a balanced/impartial nation so that you may be witnesses over the people, and that the messenger may be witness over you. We did not make the focal point that you came on except so that we know who follows the messenger from those who will turn on their heels. It was a big deal indeed except for those whom God had guided; God was not to waste your acknowledgement. God is Kind and Compassionate over the people. ... with it's co-translator opting for just "balanced" alone in their translation, since "impartial" doesn't really make sense there either.

How do you explain that? Why deviate and make the adjective in 2238 "middle"?! And if you logically realize that we are NOT the "middle" nation, but the "moderate/balanced/best" nation, then that leaves 2238 as the ONLY place that utilizes W-S-T as "middle" when it comes to the adjective W-S-T! In light of all these errors that would exist in 2238, one would really have to be forcing the translation in order for "middle" to work!

I'm glad you brought these technicalities up, now it really shows that even by your acknowledging of this, it CANNOT be "middle" as an adjective in this situation! "The middle prayer" isn't a description of how the prayer is done, or you would have to do the prayer in the middle way! How do you even do that? The middle prayer is one type of prayer (the prayer done in the middle, according to you), it is a noun altogether! Where is your utilization of the adjective aspect?!

Please explain this to me!

And again there is no redundancy since the quran could be doing one of the two.

Placing emphasis on the "middle prayer" . Words like especially and particularly are adverbs that were probably not available at the time

or

Showing that the middle prayer is not a fixed prayer (since it can be done late and early afternoon) unlike the dawn and dusk prayer which is done at fixed times.

Which one is it doing? Or is it just up in the air?

No reason to place emphasis on it, since it's not proven to be special in any way. And there are ways to emphasize/point out certain things.
Dawn and dusk prayers have ranges like I outlined above. I'm not sure why you believe they are "fixed" prayers. From the rubbing of the sun on the horizon until total darkness and twilight until the sun appears, are ranges. If you believe one must pray throughout that entire time (which to me would imply fixed), then that would also mean one has to pray the entire duration from noon or "the middle" until dusk, since it would utilize the same verse.

The two daily prayer theory is now officially crushed due to bad translation! . lol. Using nouns instead of verbs is not a sin Eikon but it sure makes a whole lot of difference in an idea won't you say.lol. All I see are people twisting the Quran and translation for there own benefit. I'm not saying that you are doing that but I am 100% sure that they are others who know what they are doing is wrong and choose not to revert. I would not bother to answer the rest of your post since i have already told you countless of times that anything that is not in the Quran but in the Bible are assumptions.

As you can see the matter was made clear with a bit of common sense. I didn't expect you to take the literal over the idea behind it, but that's fine. Just a misunderstanding as far as I see it.

And now especially with the argument shown above, the Quran does not support 3 daily salat. If you still want to force the translation even with all that has been pointed out, you still face all these issues

2238 Preserve the contact prayers, and the middle contact prayer, and stand devoutly for God.
2239 But if you are in a state of worry, then you may do so while walking or riding. If you become secure, then remember God as He has taught you what you did not know.

REDUNDANCY ERROR "Preserve the contact prayers, and the middle contact prayer" is redundant. All prayers were already addressed in the first portion. Nothing implies that it is within the day, it is all the prayers of a person's life.
ILLOGICAL ERROR "Preserve the contact prayers, and the middle contact prayer" is illogical. Granted the Arabic says "al-salat al-wusta", which specifies that it would mean THE middle prayer, and we know this is all the prayers in one's life, this would imply finding the middle salat of ALL your life's prayers. Doesn't make sense.
CONTEXT ERROR With 2239 in mind, which starts with a word along the lines of "But.." which links it to the prior verse, using the translations of "most balanced/moderate/excellent" creates a perfectly flowing and relative decree, as opposed to addressing a "middle prayer" and then simply saying what to do if you can't do it in the "most balanced/moderate/excellent way". This is as clear as day.

~4) Granted the instruction is smack-dab in the middle of a chapter about marriage and family commitments, and "aqimis/aqamas" is not in front of "salat" it is most likely that this isn't even about ritual prayer. But even then, it would say to guard your marriage/family duties in the best way, not in the "middle way". Either way, it has no place for the translation "middle".

Also, where in the Quran outlines the time for this alleged middle prayer? I've seen a few different arguments, I just want to make sure I'm aware of yours.

May peace be with you.

KDC501

Brother Eikon

I?m going to ask you two simple questions. If you don't answer me these questions plainly then don't bother to message me again because I won't answer. By then it would be clear to me that you're desperately trying the cloak the truth without any proof.

First Question
This is your translation which you believe to be correct.

2238 BE EVER mindful of prayers, and of praying in the most excellent way; and stand before God in devout obedience.

Show me in Arabic for the verb ?praying? (yuall&#299. If you can?t find the verb then obviously your translation is WAY OFF because al salat al wusta the phrase ?al salat? is indicative of a noun and NOT A VERB. So the phrase ? and of praying in the most excellent way? is completely incorrect!!! It doesn't exist!

And of course the phrase ?salat al wusta? is an adjective. It?s the same thing like ?salat al fajr? and ?salat al isha? prayers which are descriptive of the times to carry out the prays. What I am trying to show to you is the? al salat? part of the phrase in FRONT OF ?salat al wusta?. ?Al? is not prefixed with verbs! Read here http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-

Where is the ?praying? part in Arabic to support your argument of two daily prayers! Show it to me in Arabic! If there is not ?praying? part to in Arabic then the two daily pray theory is completely non-existent. If your translation is flawed your entire argument is flawed. The only alternative to the translation is this one

2238 Preserve the contact prayers, and the middle contact prayer, and stand devoutly for God.

?the middle contact prayer? = noun

? Middle ? = adjective.

Completely consistent with Arabic translation and not a single verb.

Second Question how is 2143 like 2238???

In fact, if you want to see how the translation on Corpus Quran corners itself, W-S-T as an adjective is used in 2143

We made you a community of the middle way so that you will be like witnesses over the mankind

Kevin, do you believe we are a community of the middle way (or, "the middle community&quot? I hope not. In fact, the translation you used, uses this same W-S-T adjective to mean "balanced" for 2143, despite using it as "middle" in 2238!

2143 As such, We have made you a balanced/impartial nation so that you may be witnesses over the people, and that the messenger may be witness over you. We did not make the focal point that

I?m not talking about nouns is front of adjectives ! Where did I ever say anything about that in my last post! I was taking about this simple phrase al salat al wusta ! Why bring up an example about ummatan wasaan (balanced community) ? This is nothing similar to al salat al wusta! What I am trying to show to you again is that ?al ?is not prefixed to verbs!. So this means you cannot translate 2238 as ? "and of praying in the most excellent way." The ?praying? part is not consistent with the translation. You are adding verbs that doesn't exist.

Peace,

Kevin

Eikonoklastes

Peace Kevin,

Brother Eikon

Im going to ask you two simple questions. If you don't answer me these questions plainly then don't bother to message me again because I won't answer. By then it would be clear to me that you're desperately trying the cloak the truth without any proof.

First Question
This is your translation which you believe to be correct.

2238 BE EVER mindful of prayers, and of praying in the most excellent way; and stand before God in devout obedience.

Show me in Arabic for the verb praying (yuall&#299. If you cant find the verb then obviously your translation is WAY OFF because al salat al wusta the phrase al salat is indicative of a noun and NOT A VERB. So the phrase and of praying in the most excellent way is completely incorrect!!! It doesn't exist!

And of course the phrase salat al wusta is an adjective. Its the same thing like salat al fajr and salat al isha prayers which are descriptive of the times to carry out the prays. What I am trying to show to you is the al salat part of the phrase in FRONT OF salat al wusta. Al is not prefixed with verbs! Read here http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-

Where is the praying part in Arabic to support your argument of two daily prayers! Show it to me in Arabic! If there is not praying part to in Arabic then the two daily pray theory is completely non-existent. If your translation is flawed your entire argument is flawed. The only alternative to the translation is this one

2238 Preserve the contact prayers, and the middle contact prayer, and stand devoutly for God.

the middle contact prayer = noun

Middle = adjective.

Completely consistent with Arabic translation and not a single verb.

You missed the point of my post. What I am saying is that YES THAT TRANSLATION I USED WAS WRONG... it was wrong in an unnecessary part though, but yes I admit, there is no verb for praying in the Arabic. THIS DOES NOT DEFEAT THE ENTIRE THEORY! That is a very unreasonable way to dismiss an entire argument. The translation was poor, but I figured we were both focusing on the idea at hand with "wusta". I apologize for the confusion. I do not believe any translation to be 100%, I was merely using one that I felt illustrated the point (which was usage of "wusta&quot better. Let's stick to the Corpus Quran one for now? That's fine with me.

There is no verb, you are right! bravo After I admitted that, and even put another translation to correct my mistake, I then approached you with a point, which you ignored.

What I was trying to show you, now that we were looking at the fine details with nouns, verbs, etc., is that "wusta" must act as an adjective! Before we weren't talking this technical, so I didn't consider the verb, but even as a noun it still works.

2238 Guard (Hafithoo) the (al) contact prayers (salawati) and (wa) the (al) prayer (salati) the (al) ?balanced/best way OR middle? (wusta).

salati = NOUN

wusta = ADJECTIVE

Guard the contact prayers, and the middle contact prayer. ---- Where does the other "the/al" fit? "THE middle contact prayer" is a noun, adjective not used!

Guard the contact prayers, and the contact prayer the middle. ---- Makes no sense. "Middle" not an adjective.

Guard the contact prayers, and the balanced contact prayer. ---- Where does the other "the/al" fit? "THE balanced contact prayer" is a noun, adjective not used!

Guard the contact prayers, and the contact prayer (genitive noun!) the balanced/best way. ---- "Contact prayer" is a noun, "the balanced/best way" is a working adjective to describe how to GUARD THE CONTACT PRAYERS. Thus removing redundancy, illogic, working with 2239 (if you cannot guard the contact prayers in the balanced/best way...), AND RETAINING PROPER NOUN AND ADJECTIVE USAGE! Also, is in line with how W-S-T is used as an adjective in 2143.

Unlike fajr and isha, middle is not a TIME! It is the center of something, the middle, nothing is talking about the time in this sentence, it is talking about HOW to guard the contact prayers! It is not talking about how the "middle prayer" is relative to fajr and isha. Furthermore, fajr and isha in 2458 are NOUNS, wusta is an ADJECTIVE!

Second Question how is 2143 like 2238???

Im not talking about nouns is front of adjectives ! Where did I ever say anything about that in my last post! I was taking about this simple phrase al salat al wusta ! Why bring up an example about ummatan wasaan (balanced community) ? This is nothing similar to al salat al wusta! What I am trying to show to you again is that al is not prefixed to verbs!. So this means you cannot translate 2238 as and of praying in the most excellent way. The praying part is not consistent with the translation. You are adding verbs that doesn't exist.

The two verses are similar because they both use W-S-T as ADJECTIVES! We can't be described as a middle community, it makes no sense. The Quran teaches how to use certain words by using them in other places as well.

You are mixing two separate issues, perhaps it's my fault for not being more clear. You didn't say anything about adjectives in your last post, you were talking about a verb that was there which shouldn't be. YOU WERE RIGHT! bravo Why is it so hard to see that I acknowledged things had to be shuffled to make it clear to the reader, but it wasn't literal and fixed the mistake? I know the translation was poor, but not in the IDEA. But that is not fundamental to the issue, so now that I corrected it, and put "the contact prayer" and it still works, LET US MOVE ON TO THE ISSUE!

I corrected my mistake with the verb and showed that when it's used as a noun, my point about "wusta" still stands. Now you show me how "wusta" acts as an adjective in your translation! With the usage of both "al" and in the same order.

May peace be with you.

KDC501