Surah Quraish/Words of Wisdom.
-
-
Incorrect presumption. Incorrect conclusion drawn, thus.
Dear Mazhar, thanks for the comments. I do not know if someone one saw words of wisdom or not; but it is apparent someone saw no words of wisdom at all. How unfortunate!
Please read with care nine reasons why a noun is debarred from taking the tenwin or , Wright, Vol 1 page 245 REM e. If you do not agree with reference given, what is your reference?
-
Dear Mazhar, thanks for the comments. I do not know if someone one saw words of wisdom or not; but it is apparent someone saw no words of wisdom at all. How unfortunate!
Please read with care nine reasons why a noun is debarred from taking the tenwin or , Wright, Vol 1 page 245 REM e. If you do not agree with reference given, what is your reference?
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/01.Roots%20originating%20in%20Sura%20003/104.%20Noah%20alahissalam/1.gif
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/04.%20Roots%20originating%20in%20Sura%20006/72.%20Lut%20alahissalam/2.gif
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/05.%20Roots%20originating%20in%20Sura%20007/53.%20Shoaiban%20Sheen%20Ain%20Ba/3.gif
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/05.%20Roots%20originating%20in%20Sura%20007/53.%20Shoaiban%20Sheen%20Ain%20Ba/1.gif
Proper Nouns Arent they
-
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/01.Roots%20originating%20in%20Sura%20003/104.%20Noah%20alahissalam/1.gif
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/04.%20Roots%20originating%20in%20Sura%20006/72.%20Lut%20alahissalam/2.gif
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/05.%20Roots%20originating%20in%20Sura%20007/53.%20Shoaiban%20Sheen%20Ain%20Ba/3.gif
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/05.%20Roots%20originating%20in%20Sura%20007/53.%20Shoaiban%20Sheen%20Ain%20Ba/1.gif
Proper Nouns Arent they
Dear Mazhar, ever heard of "circular logic"? If not please Google search and read about it. Presenting as an evidence something that is being questioned itself? That is the current prevalent and established understanding/translation of Quranic text as evidence for itself.
It is like saying of a kid. "I know that Bible is word of god". When asked, how do you know instead of just believing it. The response was "God never lies and in Bible God says this is his words". Therefore, "Bible has to be God's word".
Dear Mazhar don't you see tight little circle in this student's logic. Please, cite a reference from an authentic linguistic book for your claim.
-
Do you think about the above four Proper Nouns with tanwin as not proper nouns?
Which can be more authentic liguistic book for Arabic language than Grand Qur'aan, my dear man of wisdom!!
Dear Mazhar, responding to a question by another question is not considered a manner of civilized people. I asked you following.
Please read with care nine reasons why a noun is debarred from taking the tenwin or , Wright, Vol 1 page 245 REM e. If you do not agree with reference given, what is your reference?
Care to respond to above with references?
Regards,
-
You said proper nouns do not take Tanween. I told you it is not so. Then you quoted Wright about nine reasins why a noun is debarred taking tanwin. You asked me to give reference. Reference source was given by quoting from Qur'aan.
Your attention was again inivited to facts by emphasis of question form.
Also once again try to read Wright to understand what he said
In Arabic texts you find PROPER NOUNS with Tanween. Therefore, your assumption was patently incorrect.
A quote from Mortimer J. Adler
Montaigne speaks of "an abecedarian ignorance that precedes knowledge, and a doctoral ignorance that comes after it.". The second is the ignorance of those who have misread many books. They are, as Alexander Pope rightly calls them, bookful blockheads, ignorantly read. There have always been literate ignoramuses who have read too widely and not well. The Greeks had a name for such a mixture of learning and folly - sophomores. -
Dear Mazhar please do not behave like Rabbis who keep answering questions with questions without any real answers. Quran is a book written in Arabic language and not the book of Arabic language rules.
Humankind is defined by language; but civilization is defined by writing. Writing made historical records possible, and writing was the basis for the urban societies of the Old World. All humans speak; only humans in civilizations write, so speech is primary and writing is secondary. Nevertheless, written rather than spoken language received attention from scholars since antiquity standards were codified and rules were formulated. An educated minority attempted to speak as they wrote, and they assumed special prestige with command of these artificial rules and standards. All the while, the majority who spoke as they had learned from their cradle maintained their native tongues in their evolving vitality and vibrancy. Language changes continually, but writing cannot keep up, both because of social conservatism and because permanent documents remain as a continual reminder of the past standards.
With the above background, let us look at development of Quranic text. Contrary to present common belief or misbelief of most Muslims that Quranic text was transmitted as it is by the Almighty. If this would have been the real case, any thinking mind would have problems, as this would not have been possible besides a miraculous intervention.
The reality is that Arabs of pre-Islam were not a very civilized society. Furthermore, there are no real records of any written documents, besides few stone inscriptions, prior to Quran. Therefore, it is all understandable that as the society became civilized, it learned and set standards of written language. This happened over few centuries and Quranic text evolved to present text shape mainly during this time period.
So please cite a reference for your claim, instead of Rabbis like talk.
-
Humankind is defined by language; but civilization is defined by writing. Writing made historical records possible, and writing was the basis for the urban societies of the Old World. All humans speak; only humans in civilizations write, so speech is primary and writing is secondary. Nevertheless, written rather than spoken language received attention from scholars since antiquity standards were codified and rules were formulated. An educated minority attempted to speak as they wrote, and they assumed special prestige with command of these artificial rules and standards. All the while, the majority who spoke as they had learned from their cradle maintained their native tongues in their evolving vitality and vibrancy. Language changes continually, but writing cannot keep up, both because of social conservatism and because permanent documents remain as a continual reminder of the past standards.
You talk exactly I had given you a quote from a famous book.
No need of delving into anthropology of language.
Simply know what is a Proper Noun and how to identify a proper noun in a text. Your problem will be solved.
The reality is that Arabs of pre-Islam were not a very civilized society. Furthermore, there are no real records of any written documents, besides few stone inscriptions, prior to Quran. Therefore, it is all understandable that as the society became civilized, it learned and set standards of written language. This happened over few centuries and Quranic text evolved to present text shape mainly during this time period.
It is just rubbish.