Quran 2:184 - doubt about the translation of the monotheist group.
-
The Fasting is during a fixed number of days; day and night-29 or 30 of the lunar month.
Sequel to this imposition he who is suffering amongst you some sickness or is embarking on a journey may adjourn it.
Thereby, the adjourned fasting be accomplished to the count during the days of another month.
A compensation; a feed of destitute is incumbent for deferring fast upon those who have the strength to bear it in that ailment or journey without detriment .
Therefore, whoever heartily adopted a better course, thereat, that is much benefiting for him.
And remember that your observing fasting instead of adjourning it in minor bearable sickness or comfortable journey would be far better for you people.
Fasting is certainly better if you people have understood-comprehended it .
Grammatical parsing of sentences of 2184
-
Peace Sabeel Ameer,
I agree that the phrase 'but with difficulty' is an unjustifiable addition to the text of 2184.
The Monotheost Group translation is nevertheless quite good, and I pray that the authors are rewarded for their noble efforts.
If you're an English speaker, the best two translations in my view are the translations authored by Sahih International and Rashad Khalifa.
The two are quite different. The prior is faithful to syntactical nuances and is careful with its lexicon selection. The latter does not pay much regard to logistics, but instead is gracefully faithful to the "gist" of a verse and is thus extremely readable, in my view.
-
Those who have the strength to fast but do not fast or those who are unable to fats due health problems or any other genuine problem but wish to fast.
thats what we get if we add 'but with difficulty'. But as per Quran (without adding 'but with difficulty' ),its those who have the strength to fast/those who are able
Redeeming by feeding the needy - So if rich people choose to feed the poor people, isn't it good ? (but if they fast along with it, its much better for them ?
This also leads the poor people getting food ? Isn't this a part of Quran's plan for the welfare society ? But Fasting also along with it is better as Allah says it. So its the choice of the person as he can choose to fast or not to fast based on this verse ? (although fasting is better as Quran says it)
-
Peace sabel,
The word fast is not there in the Arabic sentence. It just says those who can (have the strength/ability) can ransom/redeem by 'bla bla'. It is sectarians who infer too much.
I seriously think someone should investigate the sentence about whoever is mariz and on safar too.
Kheyr is also translated as better when it could as well be good. And it is understood based on diacritical marks to infer a form of the word (!)
God bless you
-
The word fast is not there in the Arabic sentence. It just says those who can (have the strength/ability) can ransom/redeem by 'bla bla'. It is sectarians who infer too much.
Peace
ransom/redeem for what ? -
I feel I should add/clarify what I wrote
...whoever of you is ill or travelling, then the same number from other days. And as for those who are able to do it (fast/abstain)* a ransom/exchange by feeding the needy. And whoever volunteers good/better** then it is better for him. And to fast/abstain is better for you if only you knew.
*with the implication they choose not to.
** i.e. feeding the needyWith regard to "whoever volunteers good/better" I think the logic implies it is "whoever volunteers better" i.e. better than feeding the needy (e.g. in addition to that act, doing something additional, e.g. feeding more, or feed and clothe etc etc). The reason being simply "volunteering good" i.e. feeding the needy, does not come across as a voluntary act but rather what is imposed as a fidya. When the volunteer phrase is used, it suggests to me doing better than what is mentioned previously, also see 2158. My analysis here.
Also, to my logic, it suggests the correct rendering is indeed "those who are able to do it" rather than "those who are able to do with but with difficulty" due to the end of the verse stating "and to abstain/fast is better for you", implying there is an option but to fast/abstain is better.
Just some thoughts.
-
Peace Wakas
Your interpretation of the said verse is very logical and leaves no room for any doubt. It is a crystal clear explanation in the simplest of language. Keep going bravo as it makes me yay
Thanks
-
Agreed with Wakas.
salamun alaykum all.
-
Peace Sabeel,
I have a very different understanding of the fasting of Ramadhan, but in my view the redemption is from the sins accumulated and which you fast to redeem.
In the Arabic discourse there is no mention of fasting in just that phrase and most people always add 'fasting' despite the fact that it does not occur in the clause at all. I still think it would be good if someone researched about mariz and safar even if it appears obvious what they mean right at this instant. I think that the previous phrase before the discussed one plays a big role in the continuation of it.
Also akhar does not always mean other, but it can also imply last depending on which words it occurs with.
And I do not take kheyr as better but only good in the three instances of it.
But unlike some people on the forum I do not doubt however that the verses are speaking of the traditional kind of fasting. But due to the logical deduction I draw parallels from other verses speaking of fasting and of redeeming your sins through fasting to be the purpose of the 183-186.
So far I do not have a convincing translation however of the verses, even if I doubt the marathon fasts of traditional Islam and I have started touching the abused passages of the original Arabic. I consider the fast to be something you undertake voluntarily. In certain portions a prescribed number is given for various sins throughout the recitation, such as fast two months straight. I sense that the verses speak of the tradition of using fasting as a way to show repentance towards God. I doubt that fasting would benefit an otherwise obedient servant except 2-3 days every now and then such as research reports claim. I think short fasts can be nutritious for the soul and we all sin enough to allow us to suffer a fast every now and then.
However, I strongly doubt that 30 days straight of fasting would be any beneficial other than bringing difficulty for us and with minimum gains as God knows already what is in our hearts. I call it self-inflicted pain such as people with that kind of mental illnesses do to themselves. Perhaps if we had done something utterly horrible and then repent and reinforce the repentance by fasting a few months.
And, the phrase which we discussed before I delved into the moral part of this activity, I consider to be something to reinforce your show of repentance beyond fasting by feeding a poor or whatever righteous act you would like to do, if you have the resources to do so (able).
You are free to have faith in, whatever it is you work on, as God's command is not compulsory, but I choose to go for my interpretation. Verily, a long fasting which is everywhere except in that context used as a self-inflicted punishment/redemption procedure seems fishy to me.
I sure have my sins, but I consider most of the things I do in compensation for that to be sufficient. Otherwise I pray God to show me the way.
God bless you
-
peace MofF,
In the Arabic discourse there is no mention of fasting in just that phrase and most people always add 'fasting' despite the fact that it does not occur in the clause at all.
Can you clarify what phrase you are referring to? If it is the following
2184 "...waAAala allatheena yuteeqoonahu fidyatun..."
Then the "hu" refers to a preceding masculine singular object, see
http//corpus.quran.com/wordmorphology.jsp?location=(218416)If this is not "sawm" then what does it refer to?
