AlFathia
-
No, there's no word for worship in the word "allah", it's based on type or kind reference grammar, meaning the AL refers to the being of a person or whatever is attributed.
The closest possible meaning is "the Being One (he/she/it) or speaking of someone's existence.
The knowledge is always evidenced based, otherwise it is just a belief or a mere opinion. Please cite a reference for these meanings for "Al". Thanks.
-
The knowledge is always evidenced based, otherwise it is just a belief or a mere opinion. Please cite a reference for these meanings for "Al". Thanks.
Salam he is not here but those this answer your question?
Alif-Lam = The definite article "al". It is equivalent to 'the' in English. In Arabic it is used to give the meaning of Most, All, Complete, Maximum, Whole and to denote comprehensiveness, that is to say all aspects or categories of a subject, or to denote perfection and includes all degrees and grades. It is also used to indicate something which has already been mentioned or a concept of which is present in the mind of the writer or reader. ## http//ejtaal.net/aa/#q=al
-
gives the reference to attribute or kind or kindred of whatever is referenced. It is used before words because it's used to say "like" and it can't prefix proper nouns so in the case of Pharaoh it says and not as the language says "like Pharaoh". No name can be prefixed by , it's against the grammar rules and it also invalidates that would be a proper noun.
My explanation of as "being of someone" (the like of) is basically the best possible translation of the semantics. is carrying as a pronoun, just like in English, the subject's reference within a context and it says "the like of he/she/it or in more sensible English "the being of". The point with Arabic is that the Heh substantiates for example Abraham in the phrase and it's wrong to translate the Heh in English because it only binds what's spoken of to Abraham.
If you add a Ye in the same to make then it is plus and it roughly means in the attribute of (pronoun) and requires a proper linguistic argument.
That sounds very similar to Man of Faith's research of the word Allah or Al-Laheh you call it.
-
Oh?
Yeah check out Man of Faith on his research of the word Allah on this forum. You can also check his own forum if you wish to discuss with him. http//iamthatiam.boards.net
-
When we're talking about "evidence", please provide any further sound argument of why it can logically become and how it can become "he who doesn't worship" or whatever translation you opt for. Where's worship gotten from in the translation seeing there's no morpheme to indicate it.
My logic and analytical ability tells me you're deriving it from nonsensical definitions based on the nonexistent root which says "worthy of worship or praise" and then you're somehow connecting it to and basing your argument on a diacritical marker which isn't even native with the original script into claiming the second Lam is because of the "Shadda" and its design which anyone can see is an attempt at depicting that there is a duality in the language to indicate the letters are dual, binding them together and an indication of how to pronoun the word, even if it's wrong because after all, they're not native to the script but someone's opinion about it.
The so-called Shadda is used all over the language elsewhere.
Is the red your assertion or mine? If you say it is mine please show us where did I say this?
-
Here.
And I'm sorry I didn't represent your belief accurately, but the point is similar anyway
Where? It is not my belief, my claims are evidence based and hence it is knowledge. I had beliefs similar to you at one time, but these were blind beliefs without sound evidence. All based upon evidence of hearsay.
This is my final post on this topic. I just wanted to prove to all those critiques that what I present has sound linguistic bases behind it. It is not another opinion/belief or hearsay.
If the author intended there to be some hidden negation inside of a word, this would surely be printed out in an ordinary language and not by dubious diacritics, wouldn't it? The word allah is anomalous and unique as it already is, isn't it?
If it is unique and anomalous then why did you even attempt to break up the word? What about following care to respond regarding your assertions in red?
First it was Al- LEH, now it is Al- LAH. Everyone pronounces it wrong. It is also written wrong. How to verify what you claim as your understanding? Whereas, I am presenting evidence of linguistic rules after rules. Where there is a lack of rules, presenting rationale and logical interpretation based arguments upon existing linguistic rules.
LAH, what is it's root? What is it's meaning?
Take care,
-
Where? It is not my belief, my claims are evidence based and hence it is knowledge. I had beliefs similar to you at one time, but these were blind beliefs without sound evidence. All based upon evidence of hearsay.
Hearsay of what?
-
First it was Al- LEH, now it is Al- LAH. Everyone pronounces it wrong. It is also written wrong. How to verify what you claim as your understanding? Whereas, I am presenting evidence of linguistic rules after rules. Where there is a lack of rules, presenting rationale and logical interpretation based arguments upon existing linguistic rules.
LAH, what is it's root? What is it's meaning?
Salam check my reply if it answers your question
Salam/Peace i have also checked other lexicons websites
From Al-Maany Arabic dictionary https//www.almaany.com/en/dict/ar-en//?c=Islamic
( )
credit
( )
- Allah
- name of God among Muslims and among Arabs of all faiths
- God Who has all power; powerful beyond measure; the Greatest
- God (the One and Only)
( )
authorized ; licensed
( )
concessionaire ; concessioner ; licensee
( )
has
- 3rd singular present of have
- own something or have it to use it
( )
endorsee
( )
Allah ; Deity ; God (the One and Only) ; the Creator ; the Lord ; the Maker (God)
From Lane's Lexicon
http//ejtaal.net/aa/img/ll/1/ll-0119.png
http//ejtaal.net/aa/img/ll/1/ll-0120.png
-
And this from Lughaat-Al-Quran
A-L-He Ibn Faris writes that it basically means ?to accept someone?s subjugation?. ?? (aleha), ?? (ilaiheh), ? ? (yalah), mean ?to seek some one?s refuge in distress?. ?? (aaleha) also means ?to be surprised?. ?? (aalaha) or ?? (yaloh) ? to give refuge to someone in distress?, or ?to take someone under one?s protection?. As such ? ? means ?to live in some house peacefully?. {T}Under these circumstances, ?? (ilahun) would mean ?someone whose refuge may be sought in danger?, or ?someone who can be requested to save one from difficulties and the concept of whose loftiness surprises one?. Some think that this word has been extracted from ? ? (laha yaleeheh), which means ?to be lofty in stature and be hidden from the naked eye? {T}. Some others say that ?? (alah) ? that person became a slave? and ? ? (al-lahahu) ? he enslaved him?. From this come ?? (taleehun) or ?? (ta?beed) which mean ?to enslave?. Also from this we have ?? (ilah) which as a verb, turns into ?? (maaluhun), as ?kitab? and ?maktoob?) This way, ?? (ilah) would mean ?a being whose rules must be accepted and whose laws must be followed and obeyed?. As such, when the Pharoah told Moosa 2629If you accept someone else as your ?ilah? then I will have you imprisoned Here ?ilah? means someone who is in power. In the same manner, it is said 2543Have you wondered about the man who became subservient to his own desires(emotions)? Similarly, about God it is said 4384He is the One who is in the heights of the skiesas well as the depths of the universe Or, the one who is the ruler of the skies as well as of this world. So the word also means ?the one with power? or ?one who rules?.Since in pagan times, people worshipped the sun and the moon etc. as being powerful, therefore ?? (ilaaha) the moon, while ?? (aalaha) the sun. This way, anything which is worshipped is called ?? (ilah). Even the idols which are worshipped are called ?? (ilah). There is a school of thought that says that Allah is a static word, which has not been derived from any other word, but others say that this word was actually ?+? (al-ilah) that gradually became ?? (Allah) {T}In the noble Quran, the word ?Allah? has been used to describe the identity of Almighty. Therefore, Allah (the Ilah in the Quran) is that lofty being which is hidden from human eyes, but compared to whose Greatness human intellect and comprehension are quite disabled. He is the One who rules the entire universe and whose obedience is a must. And we can obey Him only as per His dictates which He has endowed us with through wahi (Revelation) and which is now capsuled safely in the Quran. As such, ? ? (ati-ullaha) would mean ?follow Allah?s law?. In the same way, whatever takes place in the universe, takes place according to Allah?s law. The world of meta-physics and this world too (alamamar, alamehkhalq ) are ruled by this law. These laws have been made as He wished them to be, and they work under his control and authority. This is the ? ? (sunnatul Allah), way of Allah which undergoes no changes. (The details can be seen under the heading (Sh-Y-A). The Quran is the sum of Allah?s attributes, Allah?s laws, Allah?s orders, Allah?s Tact, Allah?s guidance, etc. All His teachings have a central point which is His Oneness or "wahdaniya". That is to announce that nothing except God?s rule is Supreme in the universe.So far as His composition or form is concerned, that is beyond our grasp because we are all finite and no finite can comprehend the infinite. However, while remaining within our mental limits, we can have some idea about Him from His 99 attributes. According to the Quran, the correct Belief is that which is according to the requirements in the Quran. Those who believe in God according to their own interpretation are not Believers, as per the Quran. This is a very important point and must be clearly understood. "God worship? and ?virtuous actions? is only right, if done according to the Quran and not according to what different people, nation or religion thinking. -
And i also found this in AlMaany dictionary https//www.almaany.com/en/dict/ar-en/%D8%A3%D9%84%D9%91%D9%87/?c=Islamic
( )
apotheosize- make someone a god or saint
- to treat someone or something with far too much respect and admirationworship
- make someone or something a god
- practise idolatry, make an idol of
- to attach someone or something to a position similar for that of god
( )
be apotheosized ; be deified ; be idolized
-
I said my last post but since you responded for the balance I have to respond.
Yes, we'll end it here.
What's meant by unique and anomalous is it's an intentional linguistic exaggeration or emphasis on but in the form of . It's a little like where there are two Lam's but you do distinguish between and . For some reason and because of ignorance this isn't done with , as people think it is one word instead of a prefix on another plain grammar and must be pronounced as such.
B
What are you saying here? Please answer in simple words. Yes and No to following questions.
- Is , as written, a one word or combination of words? If combination give your final understanding of those words?
- Are you saying it is incorrectly written in current Quran?
Yes, we'll end it here.
But I've said what can be said about the matter and it's circular reasoning here and I've elaborated as much as is necessary and if you don't hearken then I'm just wasting my time.
Do you understand what circular reasoning or logic is? It is when the conclusion of argument is same as premises. This is exactly you guys keep doing. How come? Let me tell you what circular logic is and how you guys are doing it?
-
My argument is that current translation is based upon hearsay. Also the text of Quran evolved over time. The rules of language and text were developed and preserved over time. Therefore, we need to understand current text on bases of these rules.
-
Your argument is the Quran is god's word and it is the same from day one. To support your claim, you keep presenting the translation that is being questioned from same understanding of Quran as an evidence for your conclusion.
Therefore, your argument has the same premises as your claim. This is what is called a circular reasoning. Do not trust me, as circular reasoning is not a concept of Quran. It is from logic. Please look it up.
-
- My argument is that current translation is based upon hearsay. Also the text of Quran evolved over time. The rules of language and text were developed and preserved over time. Therefore, we need to understand current text on bases of these rules.
Salam, Manny is not here but i would like to try to give a response. What hearsay are you referring to?
-
- Your argument is the Quran is god's word and it is the same from day one. To support your claim, you keep presenting the translation that is being questioned from same understanding of Quran as an evidence for your conclusion.
Are you referring to traditional translation? Because many of us happen study the Quran without the traditional viewpoint. For example the salat, many of us concluded that Salat is not ritual or contact prayer but following closely or commitment. Also see Noon research on the Birmingham Manuscript https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9607061.0
-
Are you referring to traditional translation? Because many of us happen study the Quran without the traditional viewpoint. For example the salat, many of us concluded that Salat is not ritual or contact prayer but following closely or commitment. Also see Noon research on the Birmingham Manuscript https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9607061.0
I am not talking about just few words or concept. It is all of it.
-
Therefore, your argument has the same premises as your claim. This is what is called a circular reasoning. Do not trust me, as circular reasoning is not a concept of Quran. It is from logic. Please look it up.
Here is the link https//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning
-
All current translation of Quran that everbody calls as the real Quran or word of god is based upon hearsay.
I am not quite sure of that. I have never seen anyone say that their translation is the 100% correct.
-
I am not quite sure of that. I have never seen anyone say that their translation is the 100% correct.
First of all for traditional translations there is only one mother translation by Tabari, which is all hearsay based. All other translations are improvement with some changes of words used.
Please share one translators name with his admission that his translation is not correct? Yes, I mean translation and not exegesis or tafseer.
-
First of all for traditional translations there is only one mother translation by Tabari, which is all hearsay based. All other translations are improvement with some changes of words used.
Please share one translators name with his admission that his translation is not correct? Yes, I mean translation and not exegesis or tafseer.
Who is Tabari? Edit Nevermind i found a link about him https//en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Tabari Bold I don't know if you misread my last comment, i didn't say that the person saying their translation is correct, i said that i have never seen person saying that their translation is 100% correct. Unless i misread you then apologies for that.
-
Who is Tabari? Bold I don't know if you misread my last comment, i didn't say that the person saying their translation is correct, i said that i have never seen person saying that their translation is 100% correct.
So you don't think that current Quran is correct and it has errors? So if this is the case, how could it could be the words of god?
