Grammatical Errors in the Arabic Quran
-
Hardly, do you know of the flying spaghetti monster joke atheists use to prove that there is no god?
I don't have to prove that Warsh doesn't exist, I only have to show that one, just one, exists in print, in common use.Going by your ?test of authenticty?, God would have be like a security guard, waiting to nail with a bolt of lightning anyone who dares change a letter in the hafs. It doesn?t work like that. ?Common use? here shows you?re not well acquainted with the situation. That?s my humble opinion, sorry.
At home, there is one, a Yusuf Ali translation, that was sent as a gift by a friend of my dad's when he just moved into his new job at a new city.
Your 14 Hafs do not prove anything, they only suggest that either that variant is more popular, or that you got them from the same publisher or something like that.
More popular is synonymous with with ?more eminent?. That?s all I care about. And why on earth would I get 14 Hafs from the same publisher? I have 14 different translations and sizes.
-
hey, we at least agree on something. (other than God alone, I hope)
handshakeHeh, this is one game where you won't find much agreement in the course of your discussion. Quranism is like the wild west. Anyone can say anything simply because there is (quite rightly, in my view) a total lack of authority.
What is important is that our salvations do not depend on your agreement. That you disagree with me doesn't entail that I call you the K word. Even if you never encountered Quran in your life, it wouldn't matter as long as you were a good person.
-
Heh, this is one game where you won't find much agreement in the course of your discussion. Quranism is like the wild west. Anyone can say anything simply because there is (quite rightly, in my view) a total lack of authority.
What is important is that our salvations do not depend on your agreement. That you disagree with me doesn't entail that I call you the K word. Even if you never encountered Quran in your life, it wouldn't matter as long as you were a good person.
Why are you even connecting salvation with agreement? Before, I used to care about the nitty gritty details about Quranic preservation, code 19, and stuff like that, but now I don't. It's simply because of 37
"3 7
He it is who has bestowed upon thee from on high this divine writ, containing messages that are clear in and by themselves - and these are the essence of the divine writ - as well as others that are allegorical.* Now those whose hearts are given to swerving from the truth go after that part of the divine writ** which has been expressed in allegory, seeking out confusion,*** and seeking its final meaning ; but none save God knows its final meaning.**** Hence, those who are deeply rooted in knowledge say
"We believe in it; the whole is from our Sustainer - albeit none takes this to heart save those who are endowed with insight.
*The above passage may be regarded as a key to the understanding of the Qur'an. Tabari identifies the ayat muhkamat ("messages that are clear in and by themselves" with what the philologists and jurists describe as nass - namely, ordinances or statements which are self-evident (zahir) by virtue of their wording (cf. Lisan at-'Arab, art. nass). Consequently, Tabari regards as ayat muhkamat only those statements or ordinances of the Qur'an which do not admit of more than one interpretation (which does not, of course, preclude differences of opinion regarding the implications of a particular ayah muhkamah). In my opinion, however, it would be too dogmatic to regard any passage of the Qur'an which does not conform to the above definition as mutashabih ("allegorical" for there are many statements in the Qur'an which are liable to more than one interpretation but are, nevertheless, not allegorical - just as there are many expressions and passages which, despite their allegorical formulation, reveal to the searching intellect only one possible meaning. For this reason, the ayat mutashabihat may be defined as those passages of the Qur'an which are expressed in a figurative manner, with a meaning that is metaphorically implied but not directly, in so many words, stated. The ayat muhkamat are described as the "essence of the divine writ" (umm al-kitab) because they comprise the fundamental principles underlying its message and, in particular, its ethical and social teachings and it is only on the basis of these clearly enunciated principles that the allegorical passages can be correctly interpreted. (For a more detailed discussion of symbolism and allegory in the Qur'an. see Appendix 1.)
**Lit., "that of it".
***The "confusion" referred to here is a consequence of interpreting allegorical passages in an "arbitrary manner" (Zamakhshari).
****According to most of the early commentators, this refers to the interpretation of allegorical passages which deal with metaphysical subjects - for instance, God's attributes, the ultimate meaning of time and eternity, the resurrection of the dead, the Day of Judgment, paradise and hell, the nature of the beings or forces described as angels, and so forth - all of which fall within the category of al-ghayb, i.e., that sector of reality which is beyond the reach of human perception and imagination and cannot, therefore, be conveyed to man in other than allegorical terms. This view of the classical commentators, however, does not seem to take into account the many Qur'anic passages which do not deal with metaphysical subjects and yet are, undoubtedly, allegorical in intent and expression. To my mind, one cannot arrive at a correct understanding of the above passage without paying due attention to the nature and function of allegory as such. A true allegory - in contrast with a mere pictorial paraphrase of something that could equally well be stated in direct terms - is always meant to express in a figurative manner something which, because of its complexity, cannot be adequately expressed in direct terms or propositions and, because of this very complexity, can be grasped only intuitively, as a general mental image, and not as a series of detailed "statements" and this seems to be the meaning of the phrase, "none save God knows its final meaning".
http//www.geocities.com/masad02/003
In my opinion, only a few things are important, believing in God alone, not committing shirk, being honest, helping others.
(I am done discussing this, since I don't see it as being important. Whether or not there are textual variants is not something that is important to me. If there are, I accept that humans are imperfect. If there aren't , then wow wow
I don't believe that my salvation is dependent on accepting or rejecting either of the above possibilities)As for calling me a K word (Kafir) I hadn't even suspected you of that, prior to you calling me that.
And yes, being a good person who doesnt' commit shirk is what's paramount.
I'll leave proof of Quranic preservation to God, and not worry about it.
Peace
-
Why are you even connecting salvation with agreement? Before, I used to care about the nitty gritty details about Quranic preservation, code 19, and stuff like that, but now I don't. It's simply because of 37
Good for you.
"3 7
He it is who has bestowed upon thee from on high this divine writ, containing messages that are clear in and by themselves - and these are the essence of the divine writ - as well as others that are allegorical.* Now those whose hearts are given to swerving from the truth go after that part of the divine writ** which has been expressed in allegory, seeking out confusion,*** and seeking its final meaning ; but none save God knows its final meaning.**** Hence, those who are deeply rooted in knowledge say
"We believe in it; the whole is from our Sustainer - albeit none takes this to heart save those who are endowed with insight.
*The above passage may be regarded as a key to the understanding of the Qur'an. Tabari identifies the ayat muhkamat ("messages that are clear in and by themselves" with what the philologists and jurists describe as nass - namely, ordinances or statements which are self-evident (zahir) by virtue of their wording (cf. Lisan at-'Arab, art. nass). Consequently, Tabari regards as ayat muhkamat only those statements or ordinances of the Qur'an which do not admit of more than one interpretation (which does not, of course, preclude differences of opinion regarding the implications of a particular ayah muhkamah). In my opinion, however, it would be too dogmatic to regard any passage of the Qur'an which does not conform to the above definition as mutashabih ("allegorical" for there are many statements in the Qur'an which are liable to more than one interpretation but are, nevertheless, not allegorical - just as there are many expressions and passages which, despite their allegorical formulation, reveal to the searching intellect only one possible meaning. For this reason, the ayat mutashabihat may be defined as those passages of the Qur'an which are expressed in a figurative manner, with a meaning that is metaphorically implied but not directly, in so many words, stated. The ayat muhkamat are described as the "essence of the divine writ" (umm al-kitab) because they comprise the fundamental principles underlying its message and, in particular, its ethical and social teachings and it is only on the basis of these clearly enunciated principles that the allegorical passages can be correctly interpreted. (For a more detailed discussion of symbolism and allegory in the Qur'an. see Appendix 1.)
**Lit., "that of it".
***The "confusion" referred to here is a consequence of interpreting allegorical passages in an "arbitrary manner" (Zamakhshari).
****According to most of the early commentators, this refers to the interpretation of allegorical passages which deal with metaphysical subjects - for instance, God's attributes, the ultimate meaning of time and eternity, the resurrection of the dead, the Day of Judgment, paradise and hell, the nature of the beings or forces described as angels, and so forth - all of which fall within the category of al-ghayb, i.e., that sector of reality which is beyond the reach of human perception and imagination and cannot, therefore, be conveyed to man in other than allegorical terms. This view of the classical commentators, however, does not seem to take into account the many Qur'anic passages which do not deal with metaphysical subjects and yet are, undoubtedly, allegorical in intent and expression. To my mind, one cannot arrive at a correct understanding of the above passage without paying due attention to the nature and function of allegory as such. A true allegory - in contrast with a mere pictorial paraphrase of something that could equally well be stated in direct terms - is always meant to express in a figurative manner something which, because of its complexity, cannot be adequately expressed in direct terms or propositions and, because of this very complexity, can be grasped only intuitively, as a general mental image, and not as a series of detailed "statements" and this seems to be the meaning of the phrase, "none save God knows its final meaning".
http//www.geocities.com/masad02/003Disagreed. Al-kitaab is not al-quraan. 37 is about al-kitab, al-quran is nowhere mentioned. Al-quran is ?fee umm al-kitaab? (in ?the mother of al-kitab?), its not al-kitab or umm al-kitab themselves.
In my opinion, only a few things are important, believing in God alone, not committing shirk, being honest, helping others.
(I am done discussing this, since I don't see it as being important. Whether or not there are textual variants is not something that is important to me. If there are, I accept that humans are imperfect. If there aren't , then wow wow
I don't believe that my salvation is dependent on accepting or rejecting either of the above possibilities)
As for calling me a K word (Kafir) I hadn't even suspected you of that, prior to you calling me that.
And yes, being a good person who doesnt' commit shirk is what's paramount.
I'll leave proof of Quranic preservation to God, and not worry about it.Agreed. Our salvation , as per Quran itself, lies in whether we believe, perform righteous deeds and mutually support each other with truth and patience (1031-3).
-
Salaam,
I realise you ignore my input, and this may also be disregarded, but fortunately, the detriment of that is all yours.
We have begun to establish a translation of the Qur'an on servant of the light, attempting a rendition based on the application of pure linguistics, the rules of Arabic grammar which were compiled by great Arab scholars centuries ago, as well as renowned lexicons, also compiled centuries ago, in order to preserve the original meanings of the classical Arabic words.
These books were compiled out of fear by early Arab scholars, as the meanings and concepts were felt to be changing with the most rapid translocation, and translations of this great Book, out of the confines of the original text, in whose pure language it was revealed. Subsequently these original Arabic books from the time of the Rasul were deposited, and protected in the custody of the great libraries across the Muslim world, and became hidden, decreasingly available for review in general, resulting in subsequent confusion and significant discrepancy in the understanding of the text of Al Qur'an, by the ensuing scholars.
(Reference Rasul Muhammad 570 - 622 AD)
Grammar in Arabic (, meaning "rules", underwent development in the late 700s. The earliest known Arabic grammarian is Abd Allah ibn Abi Isaq. The efforts of three proceeding generations of grammarians culminated in the book of the Persian scholar Sibawayhi.
Ab Bishr Amr ibn Uthmn ibn Qanbar Al-Bishr (akaSbawayh) (Sibuyeh in Persian, Sbawayh in Arabic, ه was a linguist of Persian origin born ca. 760 in the town of Bayza (ancient Nesayak) in the Fars province of Iran, died in Shiraz, also in the Fars, around 180 AH (796-797).
He was one of the earliest grammarians, and his work is now perceived as the authorative reference, so the universally applied grammatical rules of the classical Arabic language, and his phonetic descriptions of Arabic are considered today the most precise ever made, leading some to compare him with Panini. He was greatly helped to spread his Persian grammatical version of the Arabic language in the Middle East, which has contaminated the entire world today.
Sibawayh was the first non-Arab to write on Arabic grammar and therefore the first one to explain Arabic grammar from a non-Arab perspective. Much of the impetus for this work came from the desire for non-Arab Muslims to understand the Qur?an; the Qur'an, which is composed in a poetic language that even native Arabic speakers must study with great care in order to pronounce correctly, is even more difficult for those who, like Sibawayh, did not grow up speaking Arabic. Additionally, because Arabic does not necessarily mark all pronounced vowel sounds, it is possible to misread a text aloud; such difficulty was particularly troublesome for emotionally religious Muslims, who regard the Qur'an as the literal word of Allah to man and as such should never be mispronounced or misread. This ignorance of the Arabic language and the desire to pronounce the sounds with great precision, allowed the Persians to corrupt the rules of grammar and in so doing change the understanding of the written Arabic without changing the written or spoken Arabic itself.
After studying in Basra, Iraq, with a prominent grammarian, Sbawayh received recognition as a grammarian himself. Sbawayh is said to have left Iraq and retired to Shrz after losing a debate with Al-Farra a rival on Bedouin Arabic usage, although there are three variations of the same story, all three culminate in the same conclusion that Sibawayh is a great calamity in the correct understanding of the Classical Arabic language.
This calamity resulted in not easily understanding the guidance of the Qur?an, so began the desire for comprehension, a profuse amount of literature explaining historical events written centuries after they occurred, as well as proliferation of the books claiming to be the words of the Rasul (Messenger), which a reasoned mind knows comprises of pure unmitigated conjecture, poured forth.
This subtle alteration of grammatical rules would only impact upon translations, as it leaves the text itself unaltered, being established at the very infancy of the founding of the translations, it would also accelerate the mutation of the classical Arabic language, as outside pressures would increase with religious piety.
With the translations holding only the shadow of the message of the Qur?an it was no longer a crystal clear guide, people looked for clarity.
The birth of Hadith, polluted the world.
The first ever book compiled over a century after the Rasul?s life, had no more than about 150 of such defamations.
However, their number increased to hundreds of thousands, by the time another book of defamations was compiled, more than two centuries after Muhammad?s death.
These often dubious historical events and the defamations compiled later, subsequently became the main source of misunderstanding the verses of the Qur'an, naturally with a significant difference in confusions among the scholars.
Allah guarantees the text of the Qur'an, and even the grammatical signs, including Gezm, fetha, kessra, dumma and multiple other signs used with the script which were put in painstakingly by the companions of the Rasul to preserve the words and the meanings to the best of their capabilities, remain unchanged.
In addition to this, these rules of grammar, used by the script writers, and the original meanings of the words as understood by the companions and the Rasul were all preserved in the form of grammar books and lexicons by the scholars in that era.
These books were revisited by some scholars, but the most detailed work of translation of these preserved books was done by the western scholars, of which Edward William Lane was one of the greatest linguist of the Arabic language, who spent his lifetime translating these lexicons, with permission from the authorities who have the custody to the original work of the Muslim world.
With the explosion of the electronic media, and the advent of the internet, these books have now become available to all who wish to use them, to better understand the Qur'an and make an attempt to remove, not only the discrepancies in the established understandings, but also to make the Qur'an understandable purely on the basis of the language, without the help of Hadith or history books compiled much later, centuries after the death of the Rasul Muhammad.
-
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599400.msg229880#msg229880
The thread continues here.
I changed the subject line to better reflect the contents of this thread.
Is the Quran preserved to the last letter?
If the Quran is preserved to the last letter then, of all the versions, only 1 could be the real one, which one? and how to confirm it, is a question.