Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Users
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Free Minds Forum Icon
  1. Home
  2. General Issues / Questions
  3. Questions/Comments on the Quran
  4. A Challenge to all Arab Linguists arround the Globe

A Challenge to all Arab Linguists arround the Globe

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Questions/Comments on the Quran
132 Posts 11 Posters 111 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • P Offline
    P Offline
    progod
    wrote on last edited by
    #103

    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 woman

    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.

    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

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • B Offline
      B Offline
      bkanwar2
      wrote on last edited by
      #104

      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,
      Anwar

      Here 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,
      Anwar

      Here 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,
      Anwar

      Please 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,
      Anwar

      Already 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

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • P Offline
        P Offline
        progod
        wrote on last edited by
        #105

        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&#039, 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

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • K Offline
          K Offline
          kn
          wrote on last edited by
          #106

          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

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • P Offline
            P Offline
            progod
            wrote on last edited by
            #107

            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

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • B Offline
              B Offline
              bkanwar2
              wrote on last edited by
              #108

              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

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • P Offline
                P Offline
                progod
                wrote on last edited by
                #109

                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

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • B Offline
                  B Offline
                  bkanwar2
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #110

                  Peace and thanks. What would you say is the root of this word?

                  Badar

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • B Offline
                    B Offline
                    bkanwar2
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #111

                    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

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • P Offline
                      P Offline
                      progod
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #112

                      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

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • B Offline
                        B Offline
                        bkanwar2
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #113

                        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

                        Honestly, 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

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • B Offline
                          B Offline
                          bkanwar2
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #114

                          Peace to all, anybody, please meanings of these words with explanation .

                          Badar

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • B Offline
                            B Offline
                            bkanwar2
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #115

                            Thanks every body and never mind.

                            Badar

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • B Offline
                              B Offline
                              bkanwar2
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #116

                              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

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • P Offline
                                P Offline
                                progod
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #117

                                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

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • F Offline
                                  F Offline
                                  Farabi
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #118

                                  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 verse

                                  425 to describe about slave owner
                                  and on 1225 on the same mean.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • B Offline
                                    B Offline
                                    bkanwar2
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #119

                                    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

                                    Thanks 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.pdf

                                    Peace

                                    Badar

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • P Offline
                                      P Offline
                                      progod
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #120

                                      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

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • B Offline
                                        B Offline
                                        bkanwar2
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #121

                                        Thanks again and peace. How about ? When one says . This Alif disappears again. If it were not Alif of ease of pronunciation i.e., Alif required at the beginning of words starting with two consonants and first being sakin; which could not be pronounced in Arabic without adding Alif or Hamza tul wasal. It would not disappear like it does with out altering the meanings of the words. The meanings still remains the same, with or without Alif. It is not rare a phenomenon; in fact it is the rule and there are so many other words as an example. E.H. Palmer makes it adundantly clear in his book of Arabic Grammar.

                                        Peace.

                                        Badar

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • F Offline
                                          F Offline
                                          Farabi
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #122

                                          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

                                          If Im not mistaken ism mean is name. Have a look at asma ulhusna (good name, ismi-hasan).

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Users