Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Users
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Free Minds Forum Icon
  1. Home
  2. General Issues / Questions
  3. Questions/Comments on the Quran
  4. AlFathia

AlFathia

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Questions/Comments on the Quran
303 Posts 10 Posters 20.7k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • The_SardarT Offline
    The_SardarT Offline
    The_Sardar
    wrote on last edited by
    #162

    Although i should have added that the reason they say that because they are trying to be unbiased. So my fault on being vague.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • B Offline
      B Offline
      bkanwar2
      wrote on last edited by
      #163

      I was trying to say that i have not seen anyone saying that their translation is 100% correct. See my previous reply.

      Who is "their" in your sentence? Are you referring to translators themselves as their? Or you are implying by saying "not seen anyone" (not a single person), saying that their (translators) translation is 100% correct?

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • The_SardarT Offline
        The_SardarT Offline
        The_Sardar
        wrote on last edited by
        #164

        Who is "their" in your sentence? Are you referring to translators themselves as their? Or you are implying by saying "not seen anyone" (not a single person), saying that their (translators) translation is 100% correct?

        If you want to be specific on "their" i am referring to Wakas, Noon, Mazhar, Manny_E, Mughal1 and a youtuber known as Quran Centric (He is Yousef Shaer in this forum https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9606314.msg348017#msg348017) I have not seen them saying their translation is without mistake. I hope this has answered your question.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • B Offline
          B Offline
          bkanwar2
          wrote on last edited by
          #165

          If you want to be specific on "their" i am referring to Wakas, Noon, Mazhar, Manny_E, Mughal1 and a youtuber known as Quran Centric (He is Yousef Shaer in this forum https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9606314.msg348017#msg348017) I have not seen them saying their translation is without mistake. I hope this has answered your question.

          If the current accepted Quran's translation/understanding is god's word and free of all errors. Why all these folks are translating it again? Did you ask them this, why are you all doing your own translations?

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • The_SardarT Offline
            The_SardarT Offline
            The_Sardar
            wrote on last edited by
            #166

            If the current accepted Quran's translation/understanding is god's word and free of all errors. Why all these folks are translating it again? Did you ask them this, why are you all doing your own translations?

            Because they are trying to uncover the traditional mistranslations like for example the so-called "hand cutting verse" Check this forum post https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9608169.msg382141#msg382141

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • The_SardarT Offline
              The_SardarT Offline
              The_Sardar
              wrote on last edited by
              #167

              I really hope we are not going off topic because this post is about AlFathia.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • B Offline
                B Offline
                bkanwar2
                wrote on last edited by
                #168

                Because they are trying to uncover the traditional mistranslations like for example the so-called "hand cutting verse" Check this forum post https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9608169.msg382141#msg382141

                So if the previous translators were able to introduce few new meanings? Why not more or all of it? This is exactly the point, I am highlighting by translating and showing linguistic rules for the translating. You can't cover up a stinking shit but spraying the perfume. You need to let all that shit go or it will keep stinking again and again. Which it has been for over 1200 years now.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • The_SardarT Offline
                  The_SardarT Offline
                  The_Sardar
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #169

                  So if the previous translators were able to introduce few new meanings? Why not more or all of it? This is exactly the point, I am highlighting by translating and showing linguistic rules for the translating. You can't cover up a stinking shit but spraying the perfume. You need to let all that shit go or it will keep stinking again and again. Which it has been for over 1200 years now.

                  Woah. That is very unlike you because i have never seen you like that at all. And what do you mean a few? If you have checking other posts like Road of the Patriarch & The Search for Muhammad has Ended by brother Pazuzu. (https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9603245.0 https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9603126.0) There is more like these in this forum. I have seen a good bit of it and i am sure there are more of this. I hope you will be in a better mood because i think you may not have a good day.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • B Offline
                    B Offline
                    bkanwar2
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #170

                    is a derivative used in , but you seem to have problems with linguistic comprehension because I've given you the answer. is grammatical and based on the letters which used to be words in themselves once upon a time. I said that is basically 4 different words in one, but morphologically and from grammatical semantics it is + + which is AL - LA - HEH in pronunciation, and this isn't even close to a traditional understanding and I'd be hearing cursing Muslims if I told that openly

                    Manny, truth and knowledge needs above anything. No fear of any loss should impede one from it. I will leave you to ponder at this.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • The_SardarT Offline
                      The_SardarT Offline
                      The_Sardar
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #171

                      Manny, truth and knowledge needs above anything. No fear of any loss should impede one from it. I will leave you to ponder at this.

                      On that i agree.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • B Offline
                        B Offline
                        bkanwar2
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #172

                        Woah. That is very unlike you because i have never seen you like that at all. And what do you mean a few? If you have checking other posts like Road of the Patriarch & The Search for Muhammad has Ended by brother Pazuzu. (https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9603245.0 https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9603126.0) There is more like these in this forum. I have seen a good bit of it and i am sure there are more of this. I hope you will be in a better mood because i think you may not have a good day.

                        Sardar, I mean every single word of it. I have spend 14 years of my life on it. I have been swimming against the stream during these years. Everyone, keeps asking me why do you continue to try translating Quran. The only reason is that the concepts of real Quran has potential of solving humanity's all illness. Only if we can clean all the shit they immersed on it. It is time to accept the mistakes of our ancestors. It is also okay to say they made mistakes and they were wrong. Based upon there mistake we have been wrong so far. But here is the pristine constitution that we followed before and here we bring it back by rejecting all that religious shit in the name of Islam has been heaped upon us for centuries. I can see this time is around the corner.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • The_SardarT Offline
                          The_SardarT Offline
                          The_Sardar
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #173

                          Sardar, I mean every single word of it. I have spend 14 years of my life on it. I have been swimming against the stream during these years. Everyone, keeps asking me why do you continue to try translating Quran. The only reason is that the concepts of real Quran has potential of solving humanity's all illness. Only if we can clean all the shit they immersed on it. It is time to accept the mistakes of our ancestors. It is also okay to say they made mistakes and they were wrong. Based upon there mistake we have been wrong so far. But here is the pristine constitution that we followed before and here we bring it back by rejecting all that religious shit in the name of Islam has been heaped upon us for centuries. I can see this time is around the corner.

                          Bold 1 Well on this forum i haven't seen anyone asked that as of now. Bold 2 On that i agree, in fact i never denied of our ancestors mistakes. I agree that Islam is not a religion and not made up rituals. However i have not seen a verse saying anything against religion although Allah does criticizes ancestral tradition.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • B Offline
                            B Offline
                            bkanwar2
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #174

                            Bold 1 Well on this forum i haven't seen anyone asked that. Bold 2 One that i agree, in fact i never denied of our ancestors mistakes. I agree that Islam is not a religion and made up rituals. However i have not seen a verse saying anything against religion although Allah does criticizes ancestral tradition.

                            The meanings of vary word Allah, denies all gods and religions. Only if there is one to accept it, after due contemplation of various linguistic rules presented, overcoming ones traditional ancestral beliefs.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • The_SardarT Offline
                              The_SardarT Offline
                              The_Sardar
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #175

                              The meanings of vary word Allah, denies all gods and religions. Only if there is one to accept it, after due contemplation of various linguistic rules presented, overcoming ones traditional ancestral beliefs.

                              But i am not sure about that, i have check the root word and it says different from your research, (Not saying multiple gods, only one.) you have seen my previous replies about the root word of Allah have you? If not then please check them out because i do not wish to over-repeat myself.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • B Offline
                                B Offline
                                bkanwar2
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #176

                                But i am not sure about that, i have check the root word and it says different from your research, (Not saying multiple gods, only one.) you have seen my previous replies about the root word of Allah have you? If not then please check them out because i do not wish to over-repeat myself.

                                There is no one root that can explain written text of word Allah. There is never ever a plausible linguistic explanation given by any traditionalists that can explain all orthographic structure of Allah. Hence, please ponder upon the explanation that I have shared. Take your time.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • The_SardarT Offline
                                  The_SardarT Offline
                                  The_Sardar
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #177

                                  There is no one root that can explain written text of word Allah. There is never ever a plausible linguistic explanation given by any traditionalists that can explain all orthographic structure of Allah. Hence, please ponder upon the explanation that I have shared. Take your time.

                                  Actually i share non-traditionalists explanation like Lughaat-Al-Quran (Parvez) & Al-Maany. Lane's Lexicon i am not sure if his lexical meanings are 100% non-traditional but it is very detailed.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • B Offline
                                    B Offline
                                    bkanwar2
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #178

                                    Yet you're trying to understand the word Allah by root definitions.

                                    You are provided with full detailed explanation that you are unable to refute even at one step with linguistic rules, except with your counter explanation that you can't defend even at one step linguistically. Yet you keep arguing. It seems like a lost cause that Muslims will ever be able to perceive correct knowledge.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • B Offline
                                      B Offline
                                      bkanwar2
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #179

                                      I've defended everything I've said. But we enter circular reasoning because there's no more to add.

                                      Your so-called detailed explanation doesn't even contain any comprehensible information and it does absolutely not make any sense linguistically at all. This is nothing I consider "correct knowledge". What kind of intelligent information is "not an object of worship" based on some word which isn't even there. I've refuted you ten times over.

                                      However, (Al-Laheh) is perfectly plausible linguistically and this I've defended linguistically and it's based on how Arabic grammar works. I've said the word is an anomaly within Arabic linguistics and it is a remarkable phenomenon and probably made as an exaggeration of the plain to show a point.

                                      It is only you who is doing circular argument. One final time please give straight answers to following simple question.

                                      1. What is the root for ?
                                      2. What is the meaning of or its root?

                                      Please don't keep going in circles and waste mutual time. I have asked you these questions repeatedly and you keep dogging every-time.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • The_SardarT Offline
                                        The_SardarT Offline
                                        The_Sardar
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #180
                                        1. What is the root for ?
                                        2. What is the meaning of or its root?

                                        Salam/Peace Manny is not here but i think i have unknowingly showed the answer in page 8 in this discussion topic, check my 77th reply.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • B Offline
                                          B Offline
                                          bkanwar2
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #181

                                          Are you stupid, bkanwar2? Because I'm seriously beginning to wonder.

                                          I said is not a root but a grammatical compound based on Lam and Heh, occurs in Arabic relatively frequently and it's something you can observe. Place on this and you get and the meaning together brings "the (like) to him/her/it". Of course this isn't standard knowledge because it's digging into linguistics and morphology.

                                          is basically the only distinguishable root word in it to find the meaning for.

                                          1. Please cite a reference from an accepted Grammar book for this construct of . Nothing in any language that is said is meaningless. What is the meaning of ? Also cite another reference from Quran for ?
                                          2. what is the meaning of this root. What is the meaning of all these alphabet together as written? How do you get to these meanings. Give linguistically explanation without using a reference to hearsay, either be of Hadith/history or any other traditional accounts?
                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Users