Bakkah
-
How common was the word Mecca, though? It never occurs elsewhere as a word used for destruction.
That doesn't mean to say that validates it as a holy location. Might still be a pun and it certainly isn't a statement of reverence.
I hate to sound like Cook & Crone, but do any of the whiny Christian sources from the time of the conquest of Jerusalem mention from where those dread Saraceans hail?
-
Peace Ayman,
This is a very good observation. The root of the common noun "mekka" actually means failure or destruction. bravo bravo bravo
Peace,
Ahmad
Peace Brother
You and Ayman are trying to BEFOOL the readers .
1Bring out the PRoof for that word MECCA ( ) 's Root meaning is "DESTRUCTION". (Do not quote to me PRL ,Only Classical Arabic dicitionaries please)
2Secondly Mecca has been used in the Quran as a Proper Noun as Ibrahim ,Fir3oun" Ramadhan' etc.It cannot be translated.
Both of you need to provide the Evidence for your assertion.
If you think that Meem,Kaaf ,Kaaf are the root letters then its basic meanings are- ( 5 / 274)
(ك
To extract the bone marrow from the bone
Where does it come the "destruction"???
Please Provide ther proof in the same way as I have done.Please do not try to set an example "the blind follow the blind". We should use our own research and common sense also.
Regards
- ( 5 / 274)
-
Peace Cushan,
How common was the word Mecca, though? It never occurs elsewhere as a word used for destruction.
There are many words in the great reading that only occur once. Its common meaning was still known at the time Classical Arabic dictionaries were developed. Its of the form "F3LH" like words such as "NKBH"/disaster.
That doesn't mean to say that validates it as a holy location. Might still be a pun and it certainly isn't a statement of reverence.
It has nothing to do with any location, holy or otherwise.
I hate to sound like Cook & Crone, but do any of the whiny Christian sources from the time of the conquest of Jerusalem mention from where those dread Saraceans hail?
I recommend reading Hoyland's book "Seeing Islam as Others Saw it". In there the Romans complain that they were invaded by a coalition of Jews, heretic Christians, and a group called Muhagareye (probably Muhajireen). There is never any mention of Muslims. They say that the invaders came from the region of Hira in Northwestern Arabia.
There is more. The Romans also give dates that conflict with the traditional dates. They say that this new kingdom was formed and started attacking the Roman empire borders when Heraclius, king of the Romans, was in his eleventh year (this translates to 620-21CE). This is over ten years prior to the traditional dating of the beginning of Islamic raids on the Romans. According to traditions, at that time the prophet hasn't even emigrated yet!
Peace,
Ayman
-
Peace everyone,
Here is the Classical Arabic meaning of the common noun "mecca"
( ط
.
From the Mohit Classical Arabic dictionary, one can see that "mecca" can have the following meanings
- Sucking everything out
- Destroy and wear down
Thus, the dictionary author no doubt bewildered by why anyone would give any town such an unflattering name, speculates that the town named Mecca was called so because it wears down sins or because it destroys those who do injustice.
The common meaning fits perfectly with the context of a war and standoff in 4824.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Peace to all,
Here's the PRL for the word "makka" (or mecca)
= Miim-Kaf-Kaf = Sucking, Sucking up, Absorbing, drinking up, Destruction/Destroying, diminishing, diminution/failing; failure, to cast, to throw away, to discard, to straighten/tighten or impede/restrict, to beseech/ask/accept, crowding, competition (izdihaam).
makkah n.f. 4824
Peace,
Ahmad
-
QS,
Does The Quran tell us how to brush our teeth? If you answer no, can I then say this is strange for a book that calls itself "Tibyaanan likulli shaian" and "Kitaabun mufassalun"? Of course, any person capable of using their logic will know The Quran saying it is clear or distinguishing/detailed means almost nothing unless we know with regard to what. Once we know with regard to what, then we can contemplate on your point to see if it has any relevance. So tell us QS, if The Quran says it is "Tibyaanan likulli shaian" and "Kitaabun mufassalun", what is it with regard to?
In which verse does "tibyaanan likulli shaian" appear?
-
Peace
I just thought I'd share with you this link to a Quran Reader I have been using in case you don't already know about it. I think it is really useful because you can see all the different translations of The Holy Qur'an in English by 3 different translators (Yusuf Ali, Picktal and M.Asad) By the way, I personally prefer to use the M.Asad one because I have the Hard Back Book version of it at home and I am impressed by the way he has done the translations/interpretations, for example he tries to give the most logical explaination and also gives his reasons as to why he used that particular word or phrase. He also mentions whether the "ayat"/verse could be meant literally and/or allegorically. It's also ver useful because it has a search function. Here is the link to the Quran reader on Islamicity http//www.islamicity.com/QuranSearch/
Also, don't start shouting, I also got the QT.exe of submission.org http//submission.org/quran/ which is a useful little program where you can jump very quickly to whichever Chapter/Sura just so you can see which words are being translated as what. AND it is quite clever because you can toggle the order of the Suras (Chapters) to see which order they were revealed in (according to the person who made it do that ofcourse!) To be honest I find this version a little "blunter" than the Asad one, although sometimes more to the point/ less flowery(?). So I like to use it just to get as much input to process as possible.
Ok that's my contribution
Peace
-
If you look for the meaning of the word "hajj" as used by the people of the book, you will see that it means "feast" and it was used to denote the annual harvest feast. This is why when you read the great reading you find that 90% of the passages about "hajj" have to do with livestock and eating and offering free food.
Sounds much more feasible than to save money your whole life to fly to Mecca (which many not-so-rich people in my country had done and are still doing, i'm afraid).
Local feasts would be of much more benefit to our society--instead of funding Arab's gov for new architectures and stuff.
Peace.
-
Sounds much more feasible than to save money your whole life to fly to Mecca (which many not-so-rich people in my country had done and are still doing, i'm afraid).
Local feasts would be of much more benefit to our society--instead of funding Arab's gov for new architectures and stuff.
Peace.
I agree.
-
I downloaded a movie made by National Geographic about Hajj. Part of me would like to go, just to see the sites. But there was a lot of depressing reality in the documentary too. I don't see anything religiously fulfilling about it. And the expense and the danger would be considered ridiculous if you removed it from the 'religious' context.
-
I downloaded a movie made by National Geographic about Hajj. Part of me would like to go, just to see the sites. But there was a lot of depressing reality in the documentary too. I don't see anything religiously fulfilling about it. And the expense and the danger would be considered ridiculous if you removed it from the 'religious' context.
Cushan, can you give us a link? I think it was on TV sometimes ago (i wasn't too interested) but i'd like to have a copy... Thanks peace
-
I used a torrent from Islamic Torrents. Download a free program for torrents, either uTorrent or Vuze, then go to Islamic Torrents or ISOhunt and search Hajj. It's a good documentary. It follows an American woman, an African man and a Malaysian man on Hajj.
-
I agree with the consensus that Christopher Luxemburg's arguments are mostly bogus, but I came across a theory I hadn't heard before (dunno if his book was ever translated into English -- I've never read it, anyway).
Here's the quote as I found it
The change from initial B to initial M which should have produced Makkah (Mecca) from Bakkah is not standard in Arabic either, so this is an unexpected change.
This identification is the result of a traditional misreading of surah 396.
"Inna awwala baytin wudi
a li-n-n?si lalladh? bibakkata mub?rakan wa-hudan li-l-alam?na"Since no other explanation of this hapax legomenon "bibakkata" in the verse seemed possible, it was understood as "bi-Bakkata", with Bakkah allegedly being another name for Mecca (Arabic "Makkah", giving the understanding
"The first house established for the people was that at Bakka bibakkata, a place holy, and a guidance to all beings."
However, the Qur'an scholar Christoph Luxenberg, in his work Die syro-aram?ische Lesart des Koran. Ein Beitrag zur Entschl?sselung der Koransprache("The Syro-Aramaic
Reading of the Qur'an. A Contribution to Deciphering the Language of the Qur'an", Berlin 2000, p. 302, reads"Inna awwala baytin wudi
a li-n-n?si lalladh? tayyakahu mub?rakan wa-hudan li-l-alam?na"meaning "The first house i.e. sacred house, shrine; Ch.H.established for the people is that which He fenced in "tayyakahu" instead of the misread "bi-Bakkata" as a holy place and a guidance for the men."
The rasm, i.e. the Arabic script without all later invented diacritical marks, vowel signs etc., of both "bi-bakkata" and "tayyakahu" is exactly the same.
Could anyone tell me how this is mistaken?
-
I agree with the consensus that Christopher Luxemburg's arguments are mostly bogus, but I came across a theory I hadn't heard before (dunno if his book was ever translated into English -- I've never read it, anyway).
Here's the quote as I found it
Could anyone tell me how this is mistaken?
Salam,
If you follow Luxenberg theory you can rewrite the whole Quran but also the whole Thora, as for both books diactrical signs were added later.
The Quran was memorised by people from the begining and still does, even if not understood. For example when you take the samarcand copy which is the odlest Quran, and compare it to the current version of the Quran, part of verses or words are in not the oldest version while present in the new version (Hafs).
The Samarcand Quran is not the original one , and oldest doesn't mean guenuine or the true copy, either with or without diactrical signs.
The true copy is the one that remained in the heart of the people.I am also looking for more information about the international conference of Cairo in 1921-1924 where all muslim scholars meat and setup the final version we know today, the result are the 2 versions we know today Hafs and Warch. This means people from different countries meat and put on paper what was memorised untill then.
Peace
