[1:1] Al-Raḥmān = adjective ?
-
Salam aleykoum,
Here is the conclusion of epigraphic studies concerning the pre-Islamic period on the origin of the name of God Al-Rahmân it is a proper noun and not an adjective in the Quran, as in the time of the Prophet Muhammad.
1 - "Al-Rahmân" in inscriptions after Himyar's conversion to Judaism (around 380)
In the kingdom of Himyar, the name Rahmânân is sometimes clarified by a qualifier. In a decidedly Jewish text dating from July 523 (see the quote below), it is described as "Most High". Elsewhere, the adjective "(he who) has mercy" (mutarahham) is found in a text of unspecified orientation (either Jewish or Christian). The expression Rahmânân mutarahham is found in Islamic Arabic in the form al-Rahmân al-rahîm. Finally, in a text that may be Judaising but dating from the Christian period, we find "Rahmânân the King"
2 - "Al-Rahmân" in inscriptions after Himyar's conversion to Christianity (530-570)
In the inscriptions of Abraha (circa 532-565), who came to power after a rebellion, God the Father is always called "Rahmânân"
- "With the power, help and mercy of Rahmânân, his Messiah and the Holy Spirit"
- "With the power, support and help of Rahmânân, Lord of Heaven, and his Messiah"
- "With the power of Rahmânân and his Messiah"
3 - "Allâh al-rahmân al-rahîm" dans le Quran
- It results from the identification of Allah with al-Rahman two proper names used to designate God during this period, with a pre-eminence for the use of the name Allah, the only one known to the Meccan idolaters.
The Quran attests to this by declaring that one could pray/invoke Allah or al-Rahman indifferently
"Say, 'Call upon Allah or call upon al-Rahman. Whichever you call - to Him belong the best names'" (Q 17, v. 110).- Note also that the name Al-Rahmân cannot be used in a possessive form like rabb (Lord) or the English word "god" (e.g., "my God". This is also true for the name Allâh (Glory be to Him). Therefore, a person cannot put "my" before the name Allah, or before the name Al-Rahmân.
Thus, in the name al-Rahman was appended to that of Allah. One can suppose that al-rahim was originally an epithet of al-Rahman. This is all the more plausible as Himyarite epigraphy gives Rahmanan a very similar epithet, also formed on the root RHM, as we have seen "Rahmanan who has mercy" (Rahmanan mutarahham).
Latter, the assimilation of the two proper names became complete when Muslim theologians considered al-rahman to be an epithet of Allah "in the name of Allah, the Benevolent and Beneficent" (bi-sm Allah al-Rahman al-rahim), with Allah followed by two epithets.In conclusion, we should leave these two proper names without trying to translate them because both ultimately refer to the notion of power, help, support and mercy. The two proper nouns ultimately complement each other God as Allah, recognized as the Creator of all and The benevolent Master by the idolaters & , with al-Rahmân adding the notion of mercy.
-
Exactly.
There is a chapter on this Topic in my book.
https//haqeeqat.pk/TranslationMethadology2.htm#31.Scrutiny- Scrutiny of available translations reveals inadequacy of Ad-verbum and Ad-sensum theory of translation for Arabic.
31.1. It has vividly been pronounced that the translation of Qur’ān is not possible by resorting to Ad Verbum (word by word) and Ad Sensum i.e. sentence by sentence Theories of translation. These theories are also not relevant for the reason Arabic is written like a continuous string of words resembling the single string of protein encoding genes of Messenger RNA in human genome. And also because the writer has free and wide choice of arranging the word order to add rhetorical meanings much over and above the collective meanings of individual words and elements of sentences. Moreover, Arabic is a pro-drop language.
31.2. For proving this point, scrutiny of translations of very first Ayah would suffice. The Divine Discourse begins with these words
بِسۡمِ ٱللَّهِ ٱلرَّحْـمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيـمِ ١
31.3. Semantics in simple words is the study of the meaning of words and sentences. The first to study is the surface structure. The first Ayah comprises of a simple elliptical sentence (total eclipse-subject and predicate blocked) since it starts with a prepositional phrase and there is neither a verb nor a noun in nominative and accusative case to identify subject, predicate or object. Its four orthographic words comprise of a preposition and four nouns in genitive. Pedagogical lesson is to first learn about prepositions; and nouns and their mutual differences. It has all the three more common phrases in languages. The second pedagogical lesson is to learn identifying phrases in the Divine Discourse which can conveniently be distinguished visually. The moment we see dozens and dozens of translations, available on line, we notice they all are just word by word translation of individual words and phrases.
31.4. I have not seen in all the translations the mention of the theory and methodology they selected for their effort. But their works reveal they just did it word by word adding a copula to give sense of a sentence. We may select few, firstly giving the translation by George Sale and Rodwell since both seem to have influence on later translations.
George Sale (London, 1734) In the name of the most merciful God.
John Medows Rodwell (London, 1861) In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful.
Sahih International In the name of Allah , the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful.
Pickthall In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.
Yusuf Ali In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
Shakir In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.
Sher Ali In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful.
Muhammad Ali (Lahori Qadiani) In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful31.5. We should first determine the accuracy or otherwise of the translated text
i. Whether this English "sentence" is a complete sentence or is lacking in linkages.
ii. If it is not a complete sentence, what will be the meanings or connotation of "In the name of God"
(a) In behalf of;
(b) By the authority of;
(c) With appeal to; in appeal or reference to; or
(d) Just a swearing;
(e) Invocation a calling upon Allah.31.6. The translated "sentence" is incomplete and suffers ambiguity. English grammar tells A sentence is a group of words which starts with a capital letter and ends with a full stop (.), question mark (?) or exclamation mark (!). A sentence contains or implies a predicate and a subject. There has to be a verb in it.
31.7. Translated text can be termed as a sentence fragment. It fails to be a sentence in the sense that it cannot stand by itself. It does not contain even one independent clause. It may locate something in time and place with a prepositional phrase or a series of such phrases, but it is still lacking a proper subject-verb relationship within an independent clause. Hence Sale and Rodwell's translation is patently incorrect. Since others have just copied-plagiarized, they neither seem to have given a thought nor seem to have revisited the Arabic text to parse it and then translate. Unfortunate!
31.8. Except George Sale all have have rendered the Adjectival Phrase ٱلرَّحْـمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيـم, as two non-restrictive appositives by setting off by commas. Non-restrictive appositives are not crucial to the meaning of the sentence. The Restrictive appositive, also called essential is one which narrows down the noun it modifies. A Restrictive appositive noun or phrase is necessary to the meaning of the sentence and it is not set off by commas.
31.9. Grand Qur’ān is perhaps the only book about which majority of scholars, both believing and non-believing, quite often opt not to adhere to otherwise well accepted norms of behaviour - academic discipline of transferring a book of one language to another language. Just one example suffices to prove this unusual practice. One of the basic obligations of a Translator, who has self-assigned the task of translating a book into another language, is that he should firstly thoroughly study it to locate the Proper Nouns and identify them whether it is name of a person/sentient, or his title; place, or organization. We have in academics means and methods to distinguish a Proper Noun - Personal Name in a lengthy text. None seems to have cared to resolve whether Ar'Reh'maan is the Proper Noun - Name of Allah the Exalted, despite the fact that it finds mention for fifty-seven times in the text of Grand Qur’ān; fully declinable in all cases, genitive 21; nominative 21 times, accusative 3; and with prefixed preposition 12 times.
31.10. With regard to nouns, basic distinction in languages is common noun and proper noun. The perception of the contents of source text may be distorted extensively if it is not resolved about a noun as to whether it is a common noun or proper noun, and whether it is descriptive or non-descriptive. Proper noun is the name of a particular, individual person, place, community, or thing who/which is usually unique; it has a singular reference. A common noun on the other hand is a name in common to every person or thing of the same class or kind. According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica "a name is a word or group of words used to refer to an individual entity (real or imaginary)" (vol.24, p.733).
31.11. The name is the code that gives basic cognition of existence and presence of a thing and person. Hence, name is the introduction for apparent/initial cognition of a thing and person. Proper nouns include personal names, place names, names of companies and organizations, and the titles of positions held by persons, titles of books, films, songs, and other media. Cognition of the code/name of a thing or person is the first step in gaining knowledge about the thing or person. Name of a thing or person gives it or him a vivid distinction from all other things and persons and makes it or him distinguished, identified, definite and isolated ; and grants ability to others to identify, and describe/remember/recall and/or mention-refer it or him to others. The name/code serves as a basis/foundation for others to enquire and study about it to gain further knowledge.
31.12. In Arabic the equivalent of name, code, noun is ٱلِٱسْمُ that stems from Root س م و. The basic perception infolded in it is of eminence, elevation, ascension, transcendence, and loftiness of a thing spread and overshadowing another thing. And this Root has been used to name a thing which has the reflection of the perception and its effect, i.e. ٱلسَّمَآءُ the Sky.
31.13. Attributive names/adjectival descriptions - epithets give further information, insight and knowledge about the thing or person introduced by a Personal Name-Proper Noun. These are complimentary in nature and help acquaint others about the inner-self of the named entity - object or person/being. Every person and thing/object has two aspects; the one evidently apparent notwithstanding whether or not it is in the range of focus of someone, and the other is the inner-self, hidden, infolded, not apparent but invisibly embedded therein بَاطِن.
31.14. The evidently apparent is the reflection of the fact of existence, and its cognition and reference is by the Name. The pursuit-journey of knowledge is from cognition of existence/Name towards knowing and perceiving the inner-self of that which exists and its relationships and equations with all that exists. We cannot have the absolute knowledge of anything and person/being unless we know its/his inner-self after its cognition, introductory knowledge of its Name.
31.15. Once we know the inner-self, all that is secreted, hidden and its relationships with everything else, we know and recognize that thing and Person in near absolute sense. Thereupon, it or He becomes more visible and apparent than the shining Sun in a bright day, even without being in visual sight—the apparent aspect of Him. Therefore, we know Him/him with such conviction, which is the absolute-exalted end of the knowledge. This type of knowledge, with reference to personalities, can be attained only about two, Ar'Reh'maan the Exalted; and Muhammad Sal'lallaa'hoalaih'wa'salam—the mercy Personified, since the بَاطِن of One is quite extensively visible to us all around, and that of the Spokesperson - the elevated Messenger through the courtesy of Grand Qur’ān.
31.16. Personal names are not translated in any language of the world. Proper names must be transcribed in the alphabet of other languages in the manner that a non-native produces the same - as-near-sound as is in the original language. Who could be a better Translator than Allah the Exalted and setter of norms and manners of translation? He the Exalted has translated perspectives of many people of various lands and languages into Arabic which are incorporated in the text of Qur’ān. He the Exalted never translated the Personal Names but spelled them in Arabic to produce near-equal sound echo of the name as was in foreign-to-Arabic language.
31.17. Like English restrictive and non-restrictive appositive, Arabic has Equivalent Appositive and Explicative Appositive . The Equivalent Appositive is a word which has attributed to it whatever is attributed to its principle while the subordinate is intended for the attribution not its principle. In Arabic, when a noun is influenced indirectly it is termed Subordinate because it follows that which precedes it in case ending . The preceding word it mimics is called the .مَتْبُوْع The apposition noun should agree with the preceding noun's case, gender and number.
31.18. As a rule the equivalent subordinate is often a Derivative Noun while the explicative subordinate is often a Substantive Noun. The principle's need of the subordinate in completing its meaning is a key indicator of Explicative Apposition. The equivalent subordinate on the other hand, is a substitute for its principle.
31.19. The third word ٱلرَّحْـمَٟنِ Ar'Reh'maan is Explicative Appositive of preceding Proper/Title Noun Allah. It is bringing a noun after the first noun. It is just another way of saying the first noun. It is also used to indicate reverence of the subject. We know that the Exalted Personalities have cognition by their Proper Name; and they are called or addressed by Title and/or personal Name for seeking their attention. Muhammad Sal'lallaa'hoalaih'wa'salam is the guide lord for humanity, he is advised to tell us whereby subtle difference between Equivalent Appositive and Explicative Appositive is rendered explicit
قُلِ ٱدْعُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ أَوِ ٱدْعُوا۟ ٱلرَّحْـمَـٰنَۖ
أَيّٙا مَّا تَدْعُوا۟ فَلَهُ ٱلۡأَسْـمَآءُ ٱلْحُسْنَىٰۚ
وَلَا تَجْهَرْ بِصَلَاتِكَ وَلَا تُخَافِتْ بِـهَا وَٱبْتَغِ بَيْـنَ ذَٟلِكَ سَبِيلٙا ١١٠You the Messenger instruct them; "You people are directed to call-address your Sustainer Lord as Allah the Exalted, or (interchangeably) call-address by personal name Ar'Reh'maan —
At whatever point in time should you wish to seek attention supplicating by any of the two names, you should address with attribution since the honorific names attributing the sublime connotation of exacting balance/ proportioned/ equilibrium/ virtue/ admirable/grandeur/ just/ majesty/absoluteness/beauty are appropriate and exclusive for Him (Ar'Reh'maan) the Exalted.
Moreover, you individual should neither perform aloud your Salat Time bound protocol of servitude and allegiance nor should you reduce it to sub-vocal/zero audibility. Instead, find a way out in between two extremes. -
We have seen in my first intervention on this post that epigraphic studies demonstrate that Al-Rahmân is a proper noun. You can find only the study of Mazhar.
Let me here adding more evidences.-
From a purely syntactic point of view, al-Raḥmān does not behave as an epithet in any case. For example, when it appears next to another noun in an annexation - iḍāfa - it is determinative. It has the same status as the name Allāh. In the Quran, we read ᶜibād Allāh, "servants of Allāh", in 7 occurrences, ᶜibād al-Raḥmān, "servants of al-Raḥmān", in 2 occurrences, āyāt Allāh, "signs of Allāh", in 19 occurrences, āyāt al-Raḥmān, "signs of al-Raḥmān", only once (19, 5, etc. This annexation, which defines the servants or signs, implies that al-Raḥmān designates an Entity in the same way as Allāh. But none of the other divine names, which are epithets, appear in this iḍāfa. The servants are affiliated with the divine person and not with one of His qualities. We find nowhere ᶜibād al-Raḥīm, ᶜibād al-Qawiyy, or āyāt al-Raḥīm.
-
When we read in the Quran "Call upon Allah or call upon al-Raḥmān" (17,110), we understand that these are two proper names designating the same Being, as there is only one god in Islam. We are not addressing a qualifier but a person who possesses the qualities that give Him the dignity to be invoked. In this case, an epithet can be added to Allah's name to support the invocation. In "O Allah the Saviour, save me!", "saviour" is an epithet that marks the quality required of Allah in this specific case.
The same applies to al-Raḥmān. The Prophet invokes Him in these terms "My Lord, judge with truth! And our Lord al-Raḥmān is the one whose help is sought " (21,112), in other words "Our Lord, al-Raḥmān, is the one whose help is sought".
There are numerous examples showing that al-Raḥmān cannot be an epithet. For instance, an epithet cannot act on its own, as in "al-Raḥmān promises..." (19, 61), "al-Raḥmān teaches..." (55, 1), "al-Raḥmān creates..." (55, 4), or "al-Raḥmān has taken His seat" (20, 5)5. Al-Raḥmān is a subject in its own right. -
Al-Rahman is a name as exclusive as that of Allah "Al-Rahman has promised His servants..." (19, 61), "The Lord of the heavens and the earth, worship Him and be steadfast in His worship. Do you know of any other who bears His name ?" (19, 65). Now the last name, as one can see very clearly, is al-Rahman. Which is to say "Do you know anyone bearing the name al-Rahman other than al-Rahman Himself?"
-
Despite all this, Muslim theology persists in teaching that this name is an adjective used to qualify Allah, and that it derives (muštaqq) from raḥma, which means "grace, mercy, clemency, sympathy, gentleness, inclination, etc.". If this were the case, then anyone could be described as raḥmān. However, the Arabic language does not suggest this anywhere. A qualifier must always vary to agree in gender and number with the noun it relates to, whilst al-Raḥmān invariably remains in the singular masculine.
-
Moreover, if it were derived from pity and mercy, it would not be cited in circumstances where these virtues are absent and where trial (Quran, 36, 23), punishment (19, 45), temptation (19, 75) or even threat (25, 26) are present. This may perhaps explain why The Monotheist Group (The Quran A Monotheist Translation) translates it as "The Almighty". However, they make the same mistake as traditional theologians in viewing Al-Rahman as an epithet rather than a proper name.
Conclusion
Nevertheless, this proper name is constructed on the basis of the root RḤM, which carries the meanings of "blood tie, womb, inclination, tenderness, etc.". Another clarification, the proper name we are dealing with here is indeed al-Raḥmān and not Raḥmān. Nowhere in the Quran do we read Raḥmān, but al-Raḥmān.
We are left only with al-Raḥmān, this proper and invariable name of which Allah alone is the holder.
"But what is al-Raḥmān?" (XXV, 60), wondered the polytheists of the Hejaz, for whom only Allāh could designate the supreme God. They will have at least left this aversion for this proper name al-Raḥmān as a legacy, as if the one God could have only one proper name, and despite what the Quran affirms in (17,110). -
-
We have seen in my first intervention on this post that epigraphic studies demonstrate that Al-Rahmân is a proper noun. You can find only the study of Mazhar.
Let me here adding more evidences.-
From a purely syntactic point of view, al-Raḥmān does not behave as an epithet in any case. For example, when it appears next to another noun in an annexation - iḍāfa - it is determinative. It has the same status as the name Allāh. In the Quran, we read ᶜibād Allāh, "servants of Allāh", in 7 occurrences, ᶜibād al-Raḥmān, "servants of al-Raḥmān", in 2 occurrences, āyāt Allāh, "signs of Allāh", in 19 occurrences, āyāt al-Raḥmān, "signs of al-Raḥmān", only once (19, 5, etc. This annexation, which defines the servants or signs, implies that al-Raḥmān designates an Entity in the same way as Allāh. But none of the other divine names, which are epithets, appear in this iḍāfa. The servants are affiliated with the divine person and not with one of His qualities. We find nowhere ᶜibād al-Raḥīm, ᶜibād al-Qawiyy, or āyāt al-Raḥīm.
-
When we read in the Quran "Call upon Allah or call upon al-Raḥmān" (17,110), we understand that these are two proper names designating the same Being, as there is only one god in Islam. We are not addressing a qualifier but a person who possesses the qualities that give Him the dignity to be invoked. In this case, an epithet can be added to Allah's name to support the invocation. In "O Allah the Saviour, save me!", "saviour" is an epithet that marks the quality required of Allah in this specific case.
The same applies to al-Raḥmān. The Prophet invokes Him in these terms "My Lord, judge with truth! And our Lord al-Raḥmān is the one whose help is sought " (21,112), in other words "Our Lord, al-Raḥmān, is the one whose help is sought".
There are numerous examples showing that al-Raḥmān cannot be an epithet. For instance, an epithet cannot act on its own, as in "al-Raḥmān promises..." (19, 61), "al-Raḥmān teaches..." (55, 1), "al-Raḥmān creates..." (55, 4), or "al-Raḥmān has taken His seat" (20, 5)5. Al-Raḥmān is a subject in its own right. -
Al-Rahman is a name as exclusive as that of Allah "Al-Rahman has promised His servants..." (19, 61), "The Lord of the heavens and the earth, worship Him and be steadfast in His worship. Do you know of any other who bears His name ?" (19, 65). Now the last name, as one can see very clearly, is al-Rahman. Which is to say "Do you know anyone bearing the name al-Rahman other than al-Rahman Himself?"
-
Despite all this, Muslim theology persists in teaching that this name is an adjective used to qualify Allah, and that it derives (muštaqq) from raḥma, which means "grace, mercy, clemency, sympathy, gentleness, inclination, etc.". If this were the case, then anyone could be described as raḥmān. However, the Arabic language does not suggest this anywhere. A qualifier must always vary to agree in gender and number with the noun it relates to, whilst al-Raḥmān invariably remains in the singular masculine.
-
Moreover, if it were derived from pity and mercy, it would not be cited in circumstances where these virtues are absent and where trial (Quran, 36, 23), punishment (19, 45), temptation (19, 75) or even threat (25, 26) are present. This may perhaps explain why The Monotheist Group (The Quran A Monotheist Translation) translates it as "The Almighty". However, they make the same mistake as traditional theologians in viewing Al-Rahman as an epithet rather than a proper name.
Conclusion
Nevertheless, this proper name is constructed on the basis of the root RḤM, which carries the meanings of "blood tie, womb, inclination, tenderness, etc.". Another clarification, the proper name we are dealing with here is indeed al-Raḥmān and not Raḥmān. Nowhere in the Quran do we read Raḥmān, but al-Raḥmān.
We are left only with al-Raḥmān, this proper and invariable name of which Allah alone is the holder.
"But what is al-Raḥmān?" (XXV, 60), wondered the polytheists of the Hejaz, for whom only Allāh could designate the supreme God. They will have at least left this aversion for this proper name al-Raḥmān as a legacy, as if the one God could have only one proper name, and despite what the Quran affirms in (17,110).Erred here.
26.10. With a view to make their statement weighty and truthful before people, they mentioned Allah the Exalted by Personal name Ar'Reh'maan
وَقَالُوا۟ لَوْ شَآءَ ٱلرَّحْـمَـٰنُ مَا عَبَدْنَٟهُـمۗ مَّا لَـهُـم بِذَٟلِكَ مِنْ عِلْمٍۖ إِنْ هُـمْ إِلَّا يَخْرُصُونَ٢٠
And they said to convince people, "Had it been the will of Ar'Reh'maan we would have not worshipped them" . There is nothing for them to tell in support about it based on knowledge— Indeed they do nothing but conjecturally guess-imagine-opine falsely (lying by commission).
26.11. They are inferring that since Ar'Reh'maan is the Almighty, therefore, had His intent been different they would not have worshipped other gods. Thereby, they are asserting the implied permission of Ar'Reh'maan the Almighty for their action. It is rebuked as forming of an opinion about which they are not certain and have no rational argument and evidence based on knowledge. It is deception to mislead people, and is lying by commission (يَخْرُصُونَ).
أَمْ ءَاتَيْنَٟهُـمْ كِتَٟبًۭا مِّن قَبْلِهِۦ فَهُـم بِهِۦ مُسْتَمْسِكُونَ٢١
Or (if they had not gained knowledge about what they say by observation) had Our Majesty given them a book before it (Qur’ān) — Whereby they have consciously made themselves determined to keep attached/restrained with it?
All 57 occurrenced
https//haqeeqat.pk/sohail/3 -
-
31.84. Polytheist elite proclaim that had it been the will of Ar'Reh'maan they would have not worshipped miscellaneous gods. They maintain their stance when asked to prostrate only for Ar'Reh'maan the Supreme Majesty
وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَـهُـمُ ٱسْجُدُوا۟ لِلرَّحْـمَـٰنِ
قَالُوا۟ وَ مَا ٱلرَّحْـمَٟنُ أَنَسْجُدُ لِمَا تَأْمُرُنَا وَزَادَهُـمْ نُفُورٙا۩ ٦٠And when it was said to them "you people prostrate exclusively for Ar'Reh'maan the Exalted" —They rebuked, "But Ar'Reh'maan has not desired and so ordered! Should we prostrate exclusively and solely what you are commanding us?" (for elisions see 4320) And it increased them, with regard to their aversion to Monotheism.
https//haqeeqat.pk/TranslationMethadology2.htm#31.Scrutiny