A Challenge to all Arab Linguists arround the Globe
-
Peace,
Not to be rude but this below was the only thing in your post that mattered. The rest just made you sound like someone trying to justify his/her mistake. I don't even know why you are acting like that fathah makes any difference. Anway, as I said a few posts ago, it would be really hard to see how nisaa' could come from anisa and be using the female suffix used in hamraa'. And I know of no situation where the first radical would drop like that and a female suffix be added in such a way. I guess you missed when I said that, it took you a few posts but I guess you are starting to realize on your own something I told you a few posts ago. Oh, well. I could just take this as me wasting my time and my words, but I'll still give it a chance. Anway, .. .
What you stated in your 2nd point below is pure nonesense and I don't even think you understand what you said. Anyway I hope you will get it one day and stop misreading and misconstruing things. BUt that is up to you.
'Based upon improved understanding from Wright = = . If this is the case. It would imply
- That cosonantal root has no female marker attached to it.
- One need to still ponder what is implying to root or else it is not related to this root at all and in reality a pronoun for the following word.
- I have yet to look up verses where this word is used to check how contextual relationship of words will help to decide its use.
Badar
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace,
Not to be rude but this below was the only thing in your post that mattered. The rest just made you sound like someone trying to justify his/her mistake. I don't even know why you are acting like that fathah makes any difference. Anway, as I said a few posts ago, it would be really hard to see how nisaa' could come from anisa and be using the female suffix used in hamraa'. And I know of no situation where the first radical would drop like that and a female suffix be added in such a way. I guess you missed when I said that, it took you a few posts but I guess you are starting to realize on your own something I told you a few posts ago. Oh, well. I could just take this as me wasting my time and my words, but I'll still give it a chance. Anway, .. .
What you stated in your 2nd point below is pure nonesense and I don't even think you understand what you said. Anyway I hope you will get it one day and stop misreading and misconstruing things. BUt that is up to you.
Godbless,
AnwarOne tries to justify his/her mistakes. When one is seeking self glorification or thinks I know it all. I am after neither. I am only trying to understand the message and want only glorification of the message and originator of the message. I have said out aloud that the language of AlKitab is lost, but revivable. I have realized the fact and admitted as such. This is in order to, neither act deluded nor be na?ve of a reality.
Please point the post of your to enlighten me where you said that word Nissa does not mean woman, in case if I missed it. I thought when I asked linguists of Arabic language, if they knew Quryesh spoke words with hemzeh. You responded by saying that ?my questions were stupid and in addition I was acting retarded?.
However, if it makes you feel better, for me to say I made a mistake in above break down of last medda of word Nisa. I am happy to admit that. As I do make lots of other mistakes as well and not at all hesitant to admit those. This is because I am an ordinary person just like any other Joe in the street Who wants to remain as such, still continue striving to understand his Rabb?s eternal message.Peace,
Badar -
Badar,
Please point the post of your to enlighten me where you said that word Nissa does not mean woman, in case if I missed it.
WHere did you get this from? I never said Nissa does not mean women. This is what I am talking about, why do you not understand what I am saying and then say I have said things that I never said? Nisaa' means women, plain and simple. But if you want to talk about the form of the word this is what I said
Anway, as I said a few posts ago, it would be really hard to see how nisaa' could come from anisa and be using the female suffix used in hamraa'. And I know of no situation where the first radical would drop like that and a female suffix be added in such a way
.How did you understand from that, that what I said was
Nissa does not mean womanI don't understand you, it's like what I say goes over your head so you try understand it is some really miscontrued and twisted way, and atleast in this case put words into my mouth.
The language of the Quran IS NOT lost. The knowledge of it has been obscured but is still obtainable for anyone who wishes to know. Get this idea out of your head and open the books up to learn from them, not prove how they are wrong with premature conclusions.
Your question about whether the Quraysh used hamza was set up in a way for you to claim 'HAA! you see there is hamza in the Quran so it can't be original as the Quraysh did not use hamza.' But you have no clue about what you are speaking and you make premature conclusions. The Arabic language was codified and organized in away that it represented the letters used by ALL tribes. And the Quraysh did use hamza's they just used them ALOT less and lightened them or assimilated them in most places. These being hamza's that are in the middle of the word or at the end. Initial hamza's they ALWAYS pronounced. So you need to take all of the statements about hamza and the Quraiysh into perspective. Some hadeeth will say the prophet did not like taqhiq of hamza, others will say he accepted them when the Quran was recited by people of other tribes. Whose to say that Gabriel picked the dialect of the Quraysh, maybe he mixed it up on purpose which is what some scholars believe, meaning that the QUran has different aspects from all the different Arabic dialects. Despite all this if you understand the relationship between weak letters in Arabic and general rules of assimilation these dialect differences are not a big deal at all. Understanding the idea of assimilation, tas-heel and tahqiq should have clarified it for you, but since you are on a mission to prove that the language of the Quran is lost I think you are prone to not want to put the evidences together and make correct conclusions.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Badar,
WHere did you get this from? I never said Nissa does not mean women. This is what I am talking about, why do you not understand what I am saying and then say I have said things that I never said? Nisaa' means women, plain and simple. But if you want to talk about the form of the word this is what I said .
How did you understand from that, that what I said was
I don't understand you, it's like what I say goes over your head so you try understand it is some really miscontrued and twisted way, and atleast in this case put words into my mouth.Godbless,
AnwarHere is what my conclusion about this word was above,
It is very evident that this word has nothing to do with women. I should have further broken it down for general audiences. is actually the Medda in , actually indicate elimination of second Alif/hemzeh . Hence, the female maker actually is and not . Since this female marker is a grammatical inovation of later time. Hence, neither relavant to language of Kureysh nor part of any original roots in the lexicon. The actual root for this word is , which is here in the lexicon.
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume8/00000039.pdf
Peace,
Badar
Here is what your response was
Peace,
Badar, even though I agree with your conclusion, how you got there is completely wrong. So yes the root of is or even noon, seen, waw. However you should read Wright, i., page 24, E., 22, to see how your conclusion about the alif-maddah is not fully correct.
equals
not
We even see that in old texts we find this
You will also see on page 27 in the second paragraph under (a) labelled REM., that the feminine form that adds alif and hamza does include a maddah. Look at the feminine form of red, Hamraa' and you will see that it takes a Maddah.
Godbless,
AnwarHere is what you are on record about Hemzeh,
Peace,
I am not disputing the lack of use of hamza by the Quraysh Arabs. I agree with you. I dispute whether the prophet Muhammad (God bless him) actually said that hadeeth NOT the general idea that the hadeeth is communicating.
Godbless,
AnwarPlease decide what you want to say. I am not trying to convince you or any one else about anything. I am on the quest of finding out the truth about message, very truthfully and will continue to share in the same spirit.
Badar,
And the Quraysh did use hamza's they just used them ALOT less and lightened them or assimilated them in most places. These being hamza's that are in the middle of the word or at the end. Initial hamza's they ALWAYS pronounced. So you need to take all of the statements about hamza and the Quraiysh into perspective.
Godbless,
AnwarAlready said if any one claims to be present at the time of prophet. Now willing to testify, how Kuryseh pronounced words? or else claim to know more Arabic than authentic Arabic lexicons, as well prophet good for him/them.
I can only go forward by shuffling through archives of written material; using gift of reason logic given to me, by my Rabb. Since there is no body speaking that language anymore, Bro.
Peace
-
Peace,
So your point in posting all that was what? I never said in any of that that nisaa' does not mean 'women' and I never contradicted myself. So what was your point in posting all that. I did decide on what I wanted to say and i said it. So why is all of that not crystal clear for you. Why are you confused by what I have been saying to the point of thinking that I said that nisaa' does not mean women or that I am not clear on the Quraysh's use of hamza. The word 'lack' does not mean 'complete omission'.
In that same passage where I say I agree with you about the lack of hamza's (I should have said lack of pronunciation of hamza's and not lack of hamza's which might be what i confusing you) I also said
But as far as I know there was not an absolute omission of all hamzas. There was actually a consistent pattern to this from what I understood, a pattern that the Quraysh as children intuitively learned from older Quraysh about which hamzas would be omitted in the Quraysh dialect and how.
So again why are you not understanding what I am saying, and posting what I have said as if it is some sort of proof against me?
Since there is no body speaking that language anymore, Bro.
ON this I can somewhat agree. But those who learn tajweed and recite the Quran, hadeeths and du'as with this sort of tajweed ARE still speaking this language. Tajweed does not mean reciting the Quran well, it means speaking Classical Arabic well, like the original Arabs around and during the time of the prophet (God bless him). And there when you open up Wright, Lane, other lexicons, grammatical books (zamakhshari and sibawayah) and you learn tajweed you are learning the various pronunciations of Old Classical Arabic of that time. So no, it is no longer spoken as a native tongue and only remnants of of it (large and small) remain in Modern Standard Arabic (a large remnant), and all of the modern 'arabic' dialects. But the knowledge has not been lost, it has just been shelved away by most of us (Muslms and modern 'Arabs', and hence obscured. Relegated to books that few people are willing to read or have ever heard of.
And this is why so many Muslims (including Quranists) understand the Quran so poorly.
Godbless,
Anwar -
I am a little confused now. But please pardom me.
As I am understanding, it is as follows, regarding Nissa.Is Brother Badar suggesting that above word does not mean women as on the previous page, and as per his explanation on the last page?
Is Brother Anwar suggesting that Nissa on the previous page means women?Please correct me if I have confused it more.
But then how do I explain the following
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume8/00000039.pdf
Salam
-
Peace,
Nisaa' means women. Always has and always will. I was discussing the grammatical form of the word, that was it. I have always believed the word to mean women AND/OR the meaning of the verbal noun of the 3rd measure of root noon, seen, waw/ya/alif.
But I have NEVER said that it does not mean 'women'. It DOES mean women. One more time, Nisaa' means women. I was just discussing the peculiar grammatical form of the word.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace to all. Here is my question in pure learning spirit and not trying to point out mistakes in Qur?an. AlrRiba commonly understood or misunderstood as ?interest?/usury. My question is. How this word should be spelled in Arabic? One finds written in Qur?an as (from www.openburhan.com site), (in, Holy Quran by Taj company LTD. English Translation by Pickthall and Urdu by Maulana Fatheh Mohhammed Jallendhri certified by Hafiz Abdul Rauf, no year of publication given). Finally, Lane says it is also or with lots of references (Lane part 3 page 1023).
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume3/00000189.pdf
Very sincerely,
Badar -
Peace,
It should be spelled as Lane says. Both ways. I would venture to even say that an alif maqsoorah could be used, unconventional but not wrong. Wright explain this phenomenon of spelling where it occurs with zakat, salat and other words.
Godbless,
Anwar -
So no one is able to find the root for this word so far. Can we accept the truth that we do not understand a bit of message due lack of knowledge of said language? Let us take this first step, in order to have the doors opened from our Rabb, towards enhance understanding of the message. In addition, let us join hands to establish a team of people sincerely devoted to this cause.
Badar
-
Peace,
I didn't answer this question because I believed that you would be able to anticipate my answer. I also believe that you were capable of figuring out the root on your own. Was I incorrect? Or is it that you have some sort of alternative agenda? Why don't you answer your own question for all to see. Honestly I think you can answer your own question.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace,
I didn't answer this question because I believed that you would be able to anticipate my answer. I also believe that you were capable of figuring out the root on your own. Was I incorrect? Or is it that you have some sort of alternative agenda? Why don't you answer your own question for all to see. Honestly I think you can answer your own question.
Godbless,
AnwarHonestly, your belief is correct. I want people who are wasting their energies in vain argumentation; lasting numerous pages on this very forum, to realize to get the basis in order first. Spend energy where it could and would produce some fruit. In due course, I shall bring up the real root and meanings as well. However, in the meantime people should try to spend some energy on something fruitful. Do not you think, this is not an unreasonable request?
May Rabb bless all.
Badar
-
Dear all, I am working on this compound from AlKitab. . This has been repeated several times. Let me give you, my take on it so far. This is to invite people for sake of enhancement of mutual knowledge.
problematic is part in red. This is a three letter word. However, it can not be from a root. This is due to jezm/sukoon on Haa. Hence Alif here is likely Hamza tul Wasal, due Haa being Sakiin for easy of reading. Hence, this Alif would not contribute any thing to meanings of word. This leaves us only with . Please comment.
May Rabb bless all.
Badar
-
Your conclusions are wrong. Hamzatul-wasl or alif-al-wasl are not prosthetic. They belong to the word. If you cannot find alif, haa and lam in the dicitonary you need to get another dictionary and look a little harder because it is in there.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Dear all, I am working on this compound from AlKitab. . This has been repeated several times. Let me give you, my take on it so far. This is to invite people for sake of enhancement of mutual knowledge.
problematic is part in red. This is a three letter word. However, it can not be from a root. This is due to jezm/sukoon on Haa. Hence Alif here is likely Hamza tul Wasal, due Haa being Sakiin for easy of reading. Hence, this Alif would not contribute any thing to meanings of word. This leaves us only with . Please comment.
May Rabb bless all.
Badar
Ahli kitab mean the torah or the injeel owners.
The words ahli also used on verse425 to describe about slave owner
and on 1225 on the same mean. -
Your conclusions are wrong. Hamzatul-wasl or alif-al-wasl are not prosthetic. They belong to the word. If you cannot find alif, haa and lam in the dicitonary you need to get another dictionary and look a little harder because it is in there.
Godbless,
AnwarThanks and peace, let us talk about more well know case and word. For example and . Please see referance below from Wright if does not open go to page 19 and Lane's page. Which last time you thought was still authentic referances.
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume4/00000159.pdf
http//www.ghazali.org/arabic/WrightArabicGrammarVol1.pdfPeace
Badar
-
Ism and ahl are different. Ism is known to be a special case. However what applies to ism does not apply to ahl. This can be seen more in the verbs that they are associated with. ism is associated with samaa and ahl with ahala. Also you should understand that there are many strange occurrences in Arabic (they are however a minority in the language) that are associated with and can be traced back to archaic verbal forms or archaic known forms. Sometimes even loan words.
Godbless,
Anwar