Are we enjoined to do sabbath ?

unknownuser

peace

thanks ayman

mquran

The only way that people will not differ on a day of rest is if they didn't take it as a "Holy-day". So for me, I couldn't care less if suddenly the government changes the weekend so that it is now Monday and Tuesday. However, in Muslim countries, sectarians will riot in support of Friday and in Christian countries, Trinitarians will boycott this government and stage sit-ins and demonstrations and in Israel, the government would fall the next day. In fact, it is so important to Christians that when the calendar was changed from the Julian to the Gregorian, ten days were taken out but the days of the week were kept in sequence because they thought that this way their "Holy-day" wouldn't get messed up.

Ok. Thanks for taking the time to answer me.

It is not "when yaumu-sabt was going on" it is "when on the day they are resting". This is a big difference. In your statement they are passive and in the actual statement from the great reading they are actually doing the action of resting. It is a big difference because this indisputably shows that they were actually OBSERVING the day of rest and NOT "desecrating" it as the corrupt translations claim. So this is their transgression that they were being punished for. In fact, they should have "desecrated" this man-made day of rest and in this case they would not have been punished and they would have got all the fish.

I don't know how you say they were observing the day when the ayat says 'laa yasbituun' in the case there was no fish for them. Yaumus-Sabt is the opposite the opposite of 'laa yasbitoon', surely?

Allow me to translate in breakdown
1)Wa As'alhum Ani Al-Qaryati And ask them about the township 2)Allat Knat irata Al-Bari which was close to the sea 3)'Idh Yadna F As-Sabti When they transgressed in the matter of as-sabt.
4)'Idh Ta'thim tnuhum Yawma Sabtihim Shurra`an When came to them their fish on their yaumus sabt openly
5)Wa Yawma L Yasbitna L Ta'thim and the day they do not 'sabt', it didn't come to them.
6)Kadhlika Nablhum Bim Kn Yafsuqna thus we try them because of their fisq.

So it seems to me that part 3 is explained by part 5. I.e, they transgressed in the matter of as-sabt BECAUSE they didn't 'sabt' and that's why the fish didn't come to them. I'd apprecite your response.

warner

Peace Ayman

Excellent analysis.

The Jews said God created everything in six days and rested on the seventh day. Was Sabbath to commemorate this day of rest? In that case it is transgression indeed.

The Quraan answers this,

50 38 We created the heavens and the earth and all between them in Six Days nor did any sense of weariness touch Us.

ayman

Peace MQ,

I don't know how you say they were observing the day when the ayat says 'laa yasbituun' in the case there was no fish for them. Yaumus-Sabt is the opposite the opposite of 'laa yasbitoon', surely?
Allow me to translate in breakdown
1)Wa As'alhum Ani Al-Qaryati And ask them about the township 2)Allat Knat irata Al-Bari which was close to the sea 3)'Idh Yadna F As-Sabti When they transgressed in the matter of as-sabt.
4)'Idh Ta'thim tnuhum Yawma Sabtihim Shurra`an When came to them their fish on their yaumus sabt openly
5)Wa Yawma L Yasbitna L Ta'thim and the day they do not 'sabt', it didn't come to them.
6)Kadhlika Nablhum Bim Kn Yafsuqna thus we try them because of their fisq.
So it seems to me that part 3 is explained by part 5. I.e, they transgressed in the matter of as-sabt BECAUSE they didn't 'sabt' and that's why the fish didn't come to them. I'd apprecite your response.

I think that you will be able to understand the passage once you understand what "sabt" means. What would help is a real word for word translation. Unfortunately, the translation that you provided leaves all the key words untranslated so it is not a word by word translation. If you understand those key words and thus are able to translate them then hopefully you will clearly understand the passage.

I have made a few corrections to your partial translation that may help you make an actual word for word translation

3)When they transgressed in the matter of the rest.
4)When their fish are coming to them the day of their resting openly.
5)and the day they are not resting, they don't come to them.
6)thus We try them with what they were deviating/transgressing.

Here are the facts from the passage

Those people transgressed in the matter of the rest.
On the day of their resting (for example, Saturday in the case of Jews) their fish came to them. Of course, they were resting so they didn't catch the fish despite the fish being apparent and close to the shore. Result no fish.
On the day they are not resting (for example, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday in the case of Jews), the fish don't come. Result no fish.
The punishment/trial is that they never got any fish despite fully knowing that there is fish out there (they see it on the day they are resting). Notice that the passage literally says "We try/punish them with what they were deviating/transgressing". Indeed, as we can see The God used their own transgression to try/punish them. It is their transgression that is keeping them from getting any fish. They could easily get the fish if they didn't observe the day of resting and instead break the resting and catch the fish when they see it near the shore.

I hope this clarifies things.

Peace,

Ayman

warner

Peace All

Peace Myr , hint well taken.

Although this verse in isolation seems to be more favorable to Aymans explanation, it will really help if someone can kindly translate ( word to word) the few other Sabbath related verses .

Also the trial in the verse can mean that to test them (whether they are breaking the Sabbath) the fish was only coming during Sabbath and not on other days. And if God tested them this way, but still they continued to observe the Sabbath patiently and implore God, He would have ceased the test if He willed. But instead , since the fish was coming only during the Sabbath and they transgressed the Sabbath because of fear of loss of income or greed then they have failed the test.

Ayman in the first explanation said ?no fish if you rest? is the only punishment mentioned in the verse. Does the verse say this was a test or a punishment? I guess that can be important.

unknownuser

Peace be upon you,

If the trial is testing them to see if they will break thier "stopping", what kind of reward is it that you starve following the God's "command"?

unknownuser

Salam mquran, all

Thank you for doing what I could not do yesterday because of lack of time, that is, translating word by word. It would be good to have also a word by word translation of all the other verses, at least members will see how God the All-Mighty clearly explains the verse and in a simple way and not this upside-down logic or sense of making a day of rest that people be cursed because they did observe it!!!!! Plus, the meaning of "ja3al'na" (we made) is clear too, see verses 2125, 2143, 433, 491, 548, 6112, 6123, 727 and many many others, they all show a meaning of to appoint/establish/to take place/to occur/command/order/put. I have never seen a manipulation of words meaning like in this forum to force what is called "logic" -).
Good luck dear-) just be prepared for another "excellent analysis"-)-). Peace.Myr.

I don't know how you say they were observing the day when the ayat says 'laa yasbituun' in the case there was no fish for them. Yaumus-Sabt is the opposite the opposite of 'laa yasbitoon', surely?

Allow me to translate in breakdown
1)Wa As'alhum Ani Al-Qaryati And ask them about the township 2)Allat Knat irata Al-Bari which was close to the sea 3)'Idh Yadna F As-Sabti When they transgressed in the matter of as-sabt.
4)'Idh Ta'thim tnuhum Yawma Sabtihim Shurra`an When came to them their fish on their yaumus sabt openly
5)Wa Yawma L Yasbitna L Ta'thim and the day they do not 'sabt', it didn't come to them.
6)Kadhlika Nablhum Bim Kn Yafsuqna thus we try them because of their fisq.

So it seems to me that part 3 is explained by part 5. I.e, they transgressed in the matter of as-sabt BECAUSE they didn't 'sabt' and that's why the fish didn't come to them. I'd apprecite your response.

Peace sister

it is crystal clear that the cursed ones were the jews who violated the sabath not the ones who honestely observed it, you can clearly read in arabic that some of them violated the sabath and Allah cursed them into monkeys, therefore to suggest that the ones who were cursed are the ones who observed it is very laughable indeed because it makes no sense, but what we can do sister?, well I can only laugh, how about you laugh with me dear sister?

cheers

unknownuser

Peace be upon you all,

I think there are people here (on this forum) whose sole purpose is to cause disruption due to the Wisdom that is being communicated. I hope we all will remain dedicate to study and remain at peace in our discussions and these people will have no effect. I will not name any names.

mquran

MyrThank you for doing what I could not do yesterday because of lack of time, that is, translating word by word. It would be good to have also a word by word translation of all the other verses, at least members will see how God the All-Mighty clearly explains the verse and in a simple way and not this upside-down logic or sense of making a day of rest that people be cursed because they did observe it!!!!! Plus, the meaning of "ja3al'na" (we made) is clear too, see verses 2125, 2143, 433, 491, 548, 6112, 6123, 727 and many many others, they all show a meaning of to appoint/establish/to take place/to occur/command/order/put. I have never seen a manipulation of words meaning like in this forum to force what is called "logic" -).
Good luck dear-) just be prepared for another "excellent analysis"-)-).

Well, one thing is clear to me, that the fish didn't come to them when they 'laa yasbitoon' and 'laa yasbitoon' is used opposite of 'yaumissabt', indicating that it's an activity as opposed to a 'day' as such. I will respond further to Ayman, below, inshaa Allah..

mquran

Ayman3)When they transgressed in the matter of the rest.
4)When their fish are coming to them the day of their resting openly.
5)and the day they are not resting, they don't come to them.
6)thus We try them with what they were deviating/transgressing.

Here are the facts from the passage

Those people transgressed in the matter of the rest.
On the day of their resting (for example, Saturday in the case of Jews) their fish came to them. Of course, they were resting so they didn't catch the fish despite the fish being apparent and close to the shore. Result no fish.
On the day they are not resting (for example, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday in the case of Jews), the fish don't come. Result no fish.
The punishment/trial is that they never got any fish despite fully knowing that there is fish out there (they see it on the day they are resting). Notice that the passage literally says "We try/punish them with what they were deviating/transgressing". Indeed, as we can see The God used their own transgression to try/punish them. It is their transgression that is keeping them from getting any fish. They could easily get the fish if they didn't observe the day of resting and instead break the resting and catch the fish when they see it near the shore.

Your interpretation works on the basis of a few (of what are to still to me) assumptions

That as-sabt refers to the traditional jewish sabbath and means 'rest'
That in 7/163, indha ta'tiihim hitanuhum means 'the fish came close to them, there is fish out there,' as you put it.
I have not researched the etymology of as-sabt but I cannot accept the 'israiliyyat' interpretations because I do not believe in a historical AQ. AQ to me is a living book and thus the condition of as-sabt is potentially replicable now by Bani Israil whom I consider to be al-muslimoon of all time.
You have seperated 'the fish came to them' and 'they caught the fish'. Well, in the word 'ta'tiihim' which is the word 'itaa' (as in aa'tuz zakaat, im sure you know), the indication of them getting the fish is already there. So when I read 'idha ta'tihim hitanuhum' , I take it to mean, they get the fish. No seperation between 'coming close' and 'catching'. This is read into the verse, im sorry to say. If the word was 'ja'aahum', then yes, you would be right.

ayman

Peace MQ,

Your interpretation works on the basis of a few (of what are to still to me) assumptions

That as-sabt refers to the traditional jewish sabbath and means 'rest'

This is your assumption. Please read carefully my previous posts. I clearly said in previous posts that it means "the resting" and it can be any day that people claim The God asked us to rest on. It doesn't matter if it is Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Eid, Christmas, XYZ or any other day of the week or the year. I gave what the Jews do only as an example.

As for the word "sabt" meaning "rest" this has nothing to do with Jews, just look it up in a dictionary and in the great reading. The word is used in the great reading in conjunction with sleep (2547) and one can see from the context that it means rest and again this has nothing to do with Jews so please stop being paranoid about Jews.

That in 7/163, indha ta'tiihim hitanuhum means 'the fish came close to them, there is fish out there,' as you put it.

So what are you saying? That the fish jumped in their lap while they were resting on their sofa or their bed? Think about it. Your interpretation makes the passage illogical. I know that The God's words are not illogical so it must be your interpretation that is wrong.

I have not researched the etymology of as-sabt but I cannot accept the 'israiliyyat' interpretations because I do not believe in a historical AQ. AQ to me is a living book and thus the condition of as-sabt is potentially replicable now by Bani Israil whom I consider to be al-muslimoon of all time.

Again, please stop being paranoid about 'israiliyyat' and all this traditional Jewish stuff that you assume. The context from the great reading confirms that the the word "sabt" means "rest". It would have probably taken you less than 2 minutes to go on Burhan's web site and verify all the occurrences of the word and confirm what I am saying. So at least make this small effort before assuming that I am part of some sinister 'israiliyyat' conspiracy. >

You have seperated 'the fish came to them' and 'they caught the fish'. Well, in the word 'ta'tiihim' which is the word 'itaa' (as in aa'tuz zakaat, im sure you know), the indication of them getting the fish is already there. So when I read 'idha ta'tihim hitanuhum' , I take it to mean, they get the fish. No seperation between 'coming close' and 'catching'. This is read into the verse, im sorry to say. If the word was 'ja'aahum', then yes, you would be right.

The word "ta'atihim" can also mean come to them. This can mean come close by or fall in their lap. It doesn't necessarily just mean fall in their lap as you imply. Indeed, if they made an effort instead of resting they would have caught the fish. How did they get the fish when they were resting? Again, it is unlikely that the fish jumped in their lap. The meaning is also clarified by the opposite "la ta'tihim" in the next part. NO FISHERMAN no matter how hard he works gets fish to fall in his lap so your interpretation implies that there is nothing amazing and certainly no punishment in the "la ta'tihim" in the next passage.

Also, where is the punishment here and what is the lesson learned? Is the lesson that when you are resting fish fall in your lap and when you don't rest and work hard you don't get fish to fall in your lap? I don't think that rewarding laziness is the message here. The God said that He CURSED the COMPANIONS/OWNERS of the resting. Certainly the COMPANIONS/OWNERS are those who OBSERVE it NOT those who don't. The Jews INVENTED the day of rest and it is a lie against The God. This is the transgression NOT violating some arbitrary manmade day of rest on the completely arbitrary manmade week. It is no wonder that you ignore to translate the word "sabt", which is the key to understanding the whole passage. In order for your interpretation to work, we must ignore the fact that "sabt" means rest and we must assume that fish fall in the lap of people and that The God rewards laziness.

Think about it carefully and please research the etymology of "as-sabt" and provide the meaning you think is best. I hope that once you do this, you will see where I am coming from and then you can help everyone who is focused on the truth reach a better understanding.

Peace,

Ayman

mquran

This is your assumption. Please read carefully my previous posts. I clearly said in previous posts that it means "the resting" and it can be any day that people claim The God asked us to rest on. It doesn't matter if it is Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Eid, Christmas, XYZ or any other day of the week or the year. I gave what the Jews do only as an example

Agreed. My mistake and apologies.

As for the word "sabt" meaning "rest" this has nothing to do with Jews, just look it up in a dictionary and in the great reading. The word is used in the great reading in conjunction with sleep (2547) and one can see from the context that it means rest and again this has nothing to do with Jews so please stop being paranoid about Jews.

It was my mistake but I reject your 'paranoia' accusation. Many Quranic concepts have been coloured by Jewish influence and so to be on one's guard is hardly being paranoid.

So what are you saying? That the fish jumped in their lap while they were resting on their sofa or their bed? Think about it. Your interpretation makes the passage illogical. I know that The God's words are not illogical so it must be your interpretation that is wrong.

What I'm saying is the fish was made available to them when they 'yasbitoon'. Catching the fish isn't part of this ayat.

So at least make this small effort before assuming that I am part of some sinister 'israiliyyat' conspiracy
.

And you accuse me of paranoia D

We may differ in methods and conclusions but I've always respected your work.

The word "ta'atihim" can also mean come to them. This can mean come close by or fall in their lap. It doesn't necessarily just mean fall in their lap as you imply. Indeed, if they made an effort instead of resting they would have caught the fish. How did they get the fish when they were resting? Again, it is unlikely that the fish jumped in their lap. The meaning is also clarified by the opposite "la ta'tihim" in the next part. NO FISHERMAN no matter how hard he works gets fish to fall in his lap so your interpretation implies that there is nothing amazing and certainly no punishment in the "la ta'tihim" in the next passage.

I'm sorry but I do not accept 'come to them' because to me, AQ uses a particular word specifically and ita'aa as used in context like 'atuu bisuratin min mithlih' tells me the function of the word.

Also, where is the punishment here and what is the lesson learned? Is the lesson that when you are resting fish fall in your lap and when you don't rest and work hard you don't get fish to fall in your lap? I don't think that rewarding laziness is the message here. The God said that He CURSED the COMPANIONS/OWNERS of the resting. Certainly the COMPANIONS/OWNERS are those who OBSERVE it NOT those who don't. The Jews INVENTED the day of rest and it is a lie against The God. This is the transgression NOT violating some arbitrary manmade day of rest on the completely arbitrary manmade week. It is no wonder that you ignore to translate the word "sabt", which is the key to understanding the whole passage. In order for your interpretation to work, we must ignore the fact that "sabt" means rest and we must assume that fish fall in the lap of people and that The God rewards laziness.

Tell me, when you sleep at night, is it because you're being lazy? Many thanks for pointing that out, by the way. I will need to understand what goes on when we sleep and reapply it back. If the fish isn't 'itaa' to them while they 'laa yasbitoon' , then it is a state replicable to the one during sleep which produces this.

Think about it carefully and please research the etymology of "as-sabt" and provide the meaning you think is best. I hope that once you do this, you will see where I am coming from and then you can help everyone who is focused on the truth reach a better understanding.

Thanks. I feel I'm on to something as it is.

unknownuser

Damn!

just when i was thinking of having a day of rest everyweek )

But thanks to Br.ayman - wonderful logic.

bravo

ayman

Peace MQ,

What I'm saying is the fish was made available to them when they 'yasbitoon'. Catching the fish isn't part of this ayat.

As you are now saying "it was made available" as opposed to it "falling in their lap" as you originally implied. This is exactly the problem. How would they catch this "available fish" when they are resting? They can't. So result is NO FISH. So the punishment is that either way they don't get fish. I am sure that you can figure that out.

And you accuse me of paranoia D
We may differ in methods and conclusions but I've always respected your work.

As you said, it is good to be careful and validate every interpretation and test it and I totally agree with this and respect it. The problem is that we need to apply this to our own interpretations first. For your interpretation to work one has to ignore that "sabt" mean rest and the fish has to fall into their laps, otherwise they wouldn't get any fish in BOTH THE CASES PRESENTED. There is no way around this. Also, you don't tell us what this day of rest is. You just claim that it was decreed by The God. So what is that day and how are those people supposed to follow The God's decree? Should they look in the Bible for it instead?

I'm sorry but I do not accept 'come to them' because to me, AQ uses a particular word specifically and ita'aa as used in context like 'atuu bisuratin min mithlih' tells me the function of the word.

MQ, tell me exactly what you think "ta'tihum" and "sabt" mean in English please.

Tell me, when you sleep at night, is it because you're being lazy? Many thanks for pointing that out, by the way. I will need to understand what goes on when we sleep and reapply it back. If the fish isn't 'itaa' to them while they 'laa yasbitoon' , then it is a state replicable to the one during sleep which produces this.

As I said before there is nothing wrong with having normal rest. The only problem is when people lie and say that The God ordered them to rest on certain days. The problem is not because of resting. It is because of lying. Now if a fisherman sleeps all day and finds all the fish ready waiting for him at the dinner table when he wakes up and when he doesn't sleep all day and works very hard he doesn't get anything then this is CERTAINLY REWARDING LAZINESS. From that point on, he will figure out that it is best to rest and not work every day. This is certainly not the message of the great reading. So this interpretation of yours can't be correct.

Thanks. I feel I'm on to something as it is.

Please have patience and make sure that you understand every single word in the passage well enough to translate it accurately. Meanwhile, I look forward to coming together to an agreement when you complete your study.

Peace and all best wishes,

Ayman

ayman

Peace brother,

just when i was thinking of having a day of rest everyweek )
But thanks to Br.ayman - wonderful logic.

You can rest on any day you want but don't claim that it was decreed by The God. If it was up to me, I would work on Saturday and Sunday and take any other two days of the week off. This way I can avoid the rush-hour traffic jams for two of my work days. Similarly when I was in Egypt I liked to work on Sunday, Saturday and Firday when traffic was light during the day. I also like to work on Christmas and take other days off instead, especially if I am travelling on vacation. This allows me to get cheap airline tickets and avoid the Christmas airport congestions. ;D

Peace and all best wishes,

Ayman

unknownuser

peace

You can rest on any day you want but don't claim that it was decreed by The God.

I agree. If you follow al quran, that cannot be argued.

warner

Peace All

Did Abraham observe Sabbath?

When was it decreed?

Was it only for the People of the book or for the Children of the Israel or for All?

Was it decreed on the day when the mount was raised and God took a covenant from the Children of Israel?

Since the command ( on the day the covenant was taken) was not to transgress the Sabbath was Sabbath decreed before the covenant was taken?

arnoldyasin

Peace,

The Bible doesn't mention that Abraham took Sabbath. This only appears in The Book Exodus; 208, 3113, Deutonorium 512-15Leviticus 252, 426,34, Jesua 564, Hebrews 49 Ezekiel 2012,228, Mathew 128, 2420 Mark 227 and Kol 216.

The story of Abraham is contained in the Book Genesis and doesn't account of any special day of rest. As for the story of Moses, we cannot attain certainty about what Laws were truly given to him and which laws were put into the story by the later people as to make them divine laws. The five Books were called the Books of Moses, but this title cannot be taken seriously. As we have edited versions of manuscripts which are labeled as being from Moses.

The Thora(books of Moses) is constructed around 500BC by what we call the editors. In those days every synagogue had their own collection of manuscripts about the laws and the history. Because of the Diaspora after Babylonia conquered Judea, the need was created to collect all these manuscripts to make one universaly used collection. So they gathered all the manuscripts and started editing them. Some manuscripts had information other maunscripts didn't had, and so they completed the others information. Also they started to mix the history with the laws so people would understand where it was formed.

So like Deutonorium and Numeri which contains the laws of Moses, are constructed out of at least 9 different manuscripts. Genesis almost the same amount. The Psalms are constructed out of several collections of songs, as psalms refers to layments. Propably only half of the Psalms are really connected with David. So all of these manuscripts are not in their original form as we have them now in the Bible. We have the edited versions from which it is hard to understand which laws and stories are real and which ones are not. Also the order is wrong in the Bible as the story of Job happened before Abraham if i'm correct.

The 'editors' as we call them, decided which piece of information was taken up in the new edited version and which pieces were not. As they constructed and formed the story in such a way around the laws of their choice, it is hard to find which were real and which were taken in. We don't know which part can be traced to Moses and which one is not. It is like Quran is mixed up together with Hadith and Tafseer and myths and then all mixed so you don't know really which is which and also parts of the Quran left out. We don't what is missing and what is real.

This also applies to the Gospels as we know they are build up from several manuscripts. Mathew,Luke had as bases Mark and on or two other sources that are lost now. Mark is based also on those sources and other ones, again lost. John is a mish-mash of Mithra legends, Gnosis and two other lost sources of Jesus-sayings as these are not found in the other three. If we look at the Gospel of Thomas, which only contains sayings of Jesus, we can see that this was the only important part of the teachings of Jesus for the first Christians, or rather Nazarene. Most Gospels are mixed sayings and history and are again chosen information by their compilers, and again we don't know what is real and what is their view.

Interresting note that Jesus even neglected the Sabbath by 'working' on them. And showed the priests ignorance and dumbness about Sabbath by asking them if they would save their donkey on Sabbath if it would fall into a ditch.

So there is no proof at all that it was a law given to Moses by God. No one can really prove or disprove that it was taking in by the editors in 500BC. The Quran and Ayman's approach do prove it was edited into the Laws by the editors. There is also no history directly to be found that it taken from another culture. But an 'observence day' was common with priesthood religions.

Hope this helps....

Peace

unknownuser

peace arnold

The Bible doesn't mention that Abraham took Sabbath. This only appears in The Book Exodus; 208, 3113, Deutonorium 512-15Leviticus 252, 426,34, Jesua 564, Hebrews 49 Ezekiel 2012,228, Mathew 128, 2420 Mark 227 and Kol 216.

Those are not part of the bible? ( i dont know too much about it) I would like info, if you don't mind.

arnoldyasin

Peace,

Bible comes from the latin biblia, which means collection of manuscripts. The Bible contains 75 different manuscripts each chosen. All these manuscripts talk about a specific prophet or history. Like the Book Genesis is the first book of the Bible, which tells the story of Adam, Abraham, Joseph and so on. The Book Exodus, Deutonorium, Leviticus tells about Moses and how he and his people were guided to Israel. Every book has it's own subject. So you wanted to know if Abraham was aquinted with the Sabbath, then it should have been mentioned in Genesis, but it is not in there, and Genesis is the only Book in the Bible telling about Abraham. The Books i gave above do contain the concept of Sabbath, and the first Book that talks about Sabbath is the book, where the story of Moses is told. Exodus, Deutonorium and Leviticus. But like i told above, we don't know for certain if that was part of the original text as they edited and included text in 500BC.

I hope this helps a bit....

Peace