-=[ Correction/Modification to FM Translation of AlQuraan ]=-
-
into revelation instead of a literal translation of Quran?
A literal translation would be "reading/recitation" not "Quran".
This part is very poorly translated as well " Non-Arabic and Arabic, say " Which is incorrect since that part of the verse is still interrogative!
http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=41&verse=44#(41441)
-
What use have candles and glasses when the owl refuses to see?
-
What use have candles and glasses when the owl refuses to see?
Glasses on an owl doesn't make much sense. ;D
In any case, if you are the owl and cannot see, I am agreeing with part of your post for which I linked to corpus, to show an alternative translation.
-
Glasses on an owl doesn't make much sense. ;D
In any case, if you are the owl and cannot see, I am agreeing with part of your post for which I linked to corpus, to show an alternative translation.
It's a local saying, don't worry about it. Corpus quran btw also translates it as Quran not as revelation.
-
I have a question about verse 2157 "For those there will be contacts from their Lord and a mercy, they are the guided ones."
Why is the word "alawtun" translated as contacts? I know it's from the word salat, but doesn't the word salat mean support in some verses of the Qur'an? For example verse 3356 says that God and the angels will SUPPORT the Prophet, but the free-minds translation says the same thing here "God and His angels make contact with the prophet. O you who believe, you shall make contact with him, and comply completely."
This doesn't make sense.. don't you guys think 'support' would be a better translation?
Peace.
-
Salam,
I can think of "reaching-out" as possibly fitting in better. "support" deviates too much from the root of the word.
That would indeed make more sense. Will this be applied to the Monotheist translation?
I noticed the author of this article also believes "reaching-out" is the best English translation https//sites.google.com/site/icrqsonweb/articles/true-salat
Peace be with you.
-
Salaam runninglikezebras,
You made some interesting points, but I'm not personally convinced.
I am assuming that the story of the people of Lot was well established before the Quran was revealed, and that the established account already claimed that the society was destroyed because it was sexually liberal, having no shame about sodomy. The Quran does not 'correct' that interpretation, despite correcting many other misconceptions that had crept into the faith. The Quran confirms what came before it, and corrects any errors people have introduced.
It seems rash to dismiss a very well established account on the basis that the Quran does not reiterate the charge of sodomy explicitly. Your earlier statements, where you reject any god that considers sodomy a sin, demonstrate that you have a theological need to conclude that sodomy is halal. You appear to be clutching at straws to achieve this though.
If sodomy is halal, and the accepted account of the destruction of Sodom is just homophobic propaganda, you would expect that to be made clear in the Quran. The absence of any correction to that effect suggests that there was nothing to correct - the established view was generally sound, and sodomy is haram.
If I've misunderstood your position, forgive me. I am genuinely interested in understanding it. If you can point me to other material, beyond the comments you've made in this thread, I'd be grateful.
Cheers
-
Just a little typo
And they say "Obedience" but when they come out from being with you a group of them prepares for other that what you have said, and God records what they planned. So turn away from them and put your trust in God. God is enough for your trust.
Should be for other than what you have said.
-
No problem, Layth. When you have ten minutes, I'd be really grateful if you'd check out the project I put together on GitHub. Your blessing would be massively appreciated there. Thanks for all the work you've done round here Layth. I hope you are happy for me to build on it, and hope you will get involved in the project once I get things more established.
https//github.com/carlsmith/quran
Thanks again man.
-
Salam,
I think these might by minor errors.
5033 Who is concerned towards the Almighty while unseen, and came with a repenting heart
(missing dot in the end)6511 A messenger who recites to you the revelations of God, which are clear, to lead those who believe and work righteousness out of the darkness into the light. Anyone who believes in God and does good works, He will admit him into estates with rivers flowing beneath them; abiding therein eternally. God has granted for him an excellent reward.
(Not sure if in bold is missing and between darkness and into. I don't know how it is in Arabic Quran, but other verses has and between them (2257, 516, 141, 145, 579))7110 ?And I said Seek forgiveness from your Lord, for He was forgiving.?
(Shouldn't it be is?)7223 It is but an announcement from God, and His messages. And whoever disobeys God and His messenger, then he will have the fire of Hell to dwell eternally therein.
(Is it messages or messengers?)Salam
-
Salam,
237 Adam then received words from His Lord, so He forgave him; He is the Forgiver, the Merciful.
Small error-His with small h.
Salam
-
Salam,
212 No, they are the corruptors, but they do not perceive.
Maybe an error, the o. Checked word "corrupters", it occurs many times, corruptor only once.
Salam
-
Salam,
Just a letter error.
2124 And Abraham was tested by commands from His Lord,...
capital H to small.
Salam
-
Salam,
a letter error
988 Their reward with their Lord are gardens of delight with
rivers flowing beneath them, abiding therein eternally. God is
satisfied with them, and they are satisfied with Him. That is for
whoever is concerned towards His Lord.Capital H.
Salam
-
Assalamualaikum
i just noticed the translation of surah rum
302 The Romans have won.
303 At the lowest part on the earth. But after their victory, they will be defeated.this translation is just in contrary to all the translation available
Ahmad Ali
The Romans have been conquered
Ali Qarai
The Byzantines has been vanquished
Amhad Khan
The Romans have been defeated.
Arberry
The Greeks have been vanquished
Corpus
Have been defeated the Romans
Daryabadi
The Byzantians have been overcome.
Hilali & Khan
The Romans have been defeated.
Maududi
The Romans have been defeated
Muhammad Sarwar
The Romans have been defeated in a nearby land and after this defeat,
Pickthall
The Romans have been defeated
Qaribullah
The Romans have been defeated (by the Persians)
Sahih Intl
The Byzantines have been defeated
Talal Itani
The Romans have been defeated.
Wahihuddin Khan
The Romans have been defeated
Yusuf Ali
The Roman Empire has been defeated-as well as it is against the historical fact
is it a mistake or is there any explanation for this translation -
There are two points already discussed in another thread if I recall correctly
1- The word Ghulibat vs. Ghalabat
Assumption that scribes might have put a "Dummah" insted of a "Fatah" on this word hense Ghulibat Ar-Rum meaning
Roman were overcome.2- Battle of Mu'tah
Muslim army was defeated in this battle hense Ghalabat Al-Rum meaning Roman overcame.
