The worship and adoration of a deity, is a mental confusion.

bkanwar2

I merely gave a link of on line grammer facility since it appeared to me little vague;

One can pronounce to others only that thing/idea-Hadith which is already saved in his memory from where he litterally cuts to eventually throw it out from his mouth by articulating the sound in speech with the help of articulators in his mouth, basically tongue and lips which becomes what is called Qaul.

Verbs or actions of mind should not only manifest in sounds or just words. But all motor actions are under the control of mind, including producing sounds i.e., belonging to verbs of mind or . There has to be harmony between, ones thought, words and the actions. This is real definition of ?truthfulness?. It is up to individuals to look up, how much they follow this sequence? By this, without any difficulty they would know the realities; unless there is seal on their mind.

Peace,

Badar

Abdun_Nur

Salaam Zulu12 and Thereformer1,

I see you have mastered the celebrated skill of the Christianised Muslim , slander, congratulations.

If you build upon these skills you may become men of God.

Thereformer1

Salaam Zulu12 and Thereformer1,
I see you have mastered the celebrated skill of the Christianised Muslim , slander, congratulations.
If you build upon these skills you may become men of God.

A-Salamo Alaykom Abdun Nur,

well, I've never never in my life seeing a christian or even read things about chritian or even bother myself in things related to christian, so you have just made a lie and of course to yourself.

I don't think Zulu12 is a christian because as I saw from his post he is a good Muslim.

well take this and try to read it 100000000...times " I've born arabic, and a Muslim" .. I suggest to write it in a paper too.

zulu12

Dear Abdun Nur

Christianised Muslim? (another one of your interpretations I see).

Damn, I thought you people had come up with all the interpretations in the world for Muslims, but you my friend, are in a different league. Am I surprised at your analogy. Of course not. If you can come up with the concept of no God (it's usually known as Atheism by the way), who are we mere mortals in your eyes.

I think it's time for you to take that magic pill again......

For the record, I am a Muslim. Not a Christianised, Jewisised, Hinduised, Buddhisised, Atheisised or any other type of 'ised' term you usually think off when your medication wears off. Just a Muslim.

Peace

Abdun_Nur

Salaam Zulu12,

have I made you think, you obviously didn't enjoy it, you think the answer is to insult and slander, a skill I'll leave in your capable hands. A muslim?

ayyub

1141 SAY "I seek refuge with the Sustainer of men, -
1142 "the Sovereign of men, -
1143 "the God of men, -
1144 "from the evil of the whispering, elusive tempter -
1145 "who whispers in the hearts of men -
1146 "from all invisible forces as well as men," -

I like this translation better, it causes me less mental confusion.

zulu12

Dear Abdun Nur

Far from it my friend. Your reason and logic is in a league of it's own. Period.

If you would have said something on the lines of 'Muslims do not use the term 'God' loosely, because God (Allah)'s attributes are way beyond human comprehension, therefore the closest translation in the English language we can get to describing Allah SWT is God', I could maybe understand where you were coming from, but what you state is beyond human logic and reasoning. Forget confusing the masses, even you yourself don't know what you're talking about.

Secondly, the beauty of people like you that conveniently use Christian this and Christian that in a negative format, is you most probably live in a Christianised country or society and will be the last person to ever leave and live in an Islamic country. If you have such problems or issues with these so called Christians and their terms of descriptions, nothing is stopping you from packing your bags and emigrating to KSA (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia by the way, just in case you thought KSA was some sort of fast food chain) and then preaching your warped interpretations there. I could be very well be wrong and you might already be living there, but judging by your confusion and the medical treatment required for your (schizo), which I heard is not very good there, I doubt it.

Peace

kn

I like this translation better, it causes me less mental confusion.

I wish that people would look up the root words of all the words used in this Surah and all other, and then present their arguments, rather than liking or disliking a thing, based on no firm grounds and based on whims alone. Also, calling people names is also not the way to knowledge.

I am trying to look up at the root words to see if the translation by Badar and Noor hold any grounds, and I was amazed to see that the root word for Naas is in fact, Nus ( Noon,waw, and S), which has been explained in detail in Lanes as confusion/ commotion as the primary meaning.

http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume8/00000120.pdf

http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume8/00000121.pdf

May I humbly request you all to please review the above link, as it really goes more in favor of commotion and mental confusion.

Would'nt it be nice, if we have a scholarly discussion with proofs in favor of our view points and then arriving at a mutual consensus, rather than slandering each other and trying to make the other person look wrong by out witting, rather than with logic and linguistic proofs and putting the proofs right here, so all can review them too.

After all the purpose here is to understand the message of our Creator correctly, rather than trying to prove each other wrong, with out putting a logical
proof which every one can review. A statement, that one knows better than the other, because one was born a Muslim or to an Arab family, does not really help anyone. We all need to put forth proves from books, so a general reader can also read the proof and may try to reach a conclusion too. In the end , we may have a better consensus, when a point is proved with scholarly discussion alone. There is no shame for any one, even if one is or was wrong, and then that person adopts the correct understanding, with grace, as any one can be right or wrong.
Its all for the purpose of knowing the message of our Rabb, as close to the real meaning as possible and nothing else.

ayyub

I wish that people would look up the root words of all the words used in this Surah and all other, and then present their arguments, rather than liking or disliking a thing, based on no firm grounds and based on whims alone. Also, calling people names is also not the way to knowledge.

I am trying to look up at the root words to see if the translation by Badar and Noor hold any grounds, and I was amazed to see that the root word for Naas is in fact, Nus ( Noon,waw, and S), which has been explained in detail in Lanes as confusion/ commotion as the primary meaning.

http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume8/00000120.pdf

http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume8/00000121.pdf

May I humbly request you all to please review the above link, as it really goes more in favor of commotion and mental confusion.

Would'nt it be nice, if we have a scholarly discussion with proofs in favor of our view points and then arriving at a mutual consensus, rather than slandering each other and trying to make the other person look wrong by out witting, rather than with logic and linguistic proofs and putting the proofs right here, so all can review them too.

After all the purpose here is to understand the message of our Creator correctly, rather than trying to prove each other wrong, with out putting a logical
proof which every one can review. A statement, that one knows better than the other, because one was born a Muslim or to an Arab family, does not really help anyone. We all need to put forth proves from books, so a general reader can also read the proof and may try to reach a conclusion too. In the end , we may have a better consensus, when a point is proved with scholarly discussion alone. There is no shame for any one, even if one is or was wrong, and then that person adopts the correct understanding, with grace, as any one can be right or wrong.
Its all for the purpose of knowing the message of our Rabb, as close to the real meaning as possible and nothing else.

I don't like it better based on my whims. From my understanding Mankind is more accurate. Arabic is a very complex language and one word could have many meanings, we could do this with every word in the Quran. I agree we should be open, weigh evidence and challenge ourselves, but I don't think just because we side with original means were close minded. You say we need to find the real meaning, that could end up being the original understanding. Sure we don't know until we check, but there is nothing wrong with ending up at the original.

Nadir_Hussain_Saiyed

Dear brother Badar,

Salaam.

Please explain the difference in 14 Malik of Yom Al Deen and 1142 Malik Al-Naas.

Why would you translate and write this word, Malik - differently in one place then the other.

Surah 14

which is with you at all times, for you to follow.
(Controller/Owner/designer/programmer of Yom Al-Deen "a little of my own&quot

Surah 1142

What is for you, the mental confusion?
(Controller/Owner/designer/programmer of Al-Naas)

"Please make a note here, both Arabic text's are just copy and pasted from your website's/post and yet you have written this word "Malik" differently you have separated Maa from liki in 14 and kept it together in 1142 but in all prints of Al-Quran i have, this is not the case, please keep the consistancy. As it has been kept for centuries.

Mr.Pervez's Lughat-ul-Quran do not agree with your meaning of (Mental confusion) as there, the root words are not (Noon, Wao, Seen) but they are (Alif, noon, seen) "ANS", meaning's, "domesticated" as oppose to "Wehshat' Junglee". Ibne Faris says the meaning of ANS is to come apparent, appear in the open as oppose to being hidden JIN.

ANS meanings are also to see and feel as in Hazart Moosa's Story (277, 2010).

4520 says Al-Qur-aan is "Haza Basairu-Le-Al-Naas" could only mean that it is Baseerat, Hidayaa, for Le-Al-Naas. or as you have been saying Baseerat, Hidaya from mental confusion. Still need to see your refrence in Lane, thats at home, will confirm your Anal-Y-sis.

ASAP.

Leyna

well, I've never never in my life seeing a christian or even read things about chritian or even bother myself in things related to christian

http//www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/traurig/sad-smiley-056.gif http//www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/traurig/sad-smiley-056.gif http//www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/traurig/sad-smiley-056.gif http//www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/traurig/sad-smiley-056.gif http//www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/traurig/sad-smiley-056.gif

Thereformer1

http//www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/traurig/sad-smiley-056.gif http//www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/traurig/sad-smiley-056.gif http//www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/traurig/sad-smiley-056.gif http//www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/traurig/sad-smiley-056.gif http//www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/traurig/sad-smiley-056.gif

what's the problem Leyna ?

Thereformer1

Dear Abdun Nur

Christianised Muslim? (another one of your interpretations I see).

Damn, I thought you people had come up with all the interpretations in the world for Muslims, but you my friend, are in a different league. Am I surprised at your analogy. Of course not. If you can come up with the concept of no God (it's usually known as Atheism by the way), who are we mere mortals in your eyes.

I think it's time for you to take that magic pill again......

For the record, I am a Muslim. Not a Christianised, Jewisised, Hinduised, Buddhisised, Atheisised or any other type of 'ised' term you usually think off when your medication wears off. Just a Muslim.

Peace

Nice shot, Way to go . rotfl

Mazhar

Dear brother Badar,

Salaam.

Please explain the difference in 14 Malik of Yom Al Deen and 1142 Malik Al-Naas.

Why would you translate and write this word, Malik - differently in one place then the other.

Surah 14

which is with you at all times, for you to follow.
(Controller/Owner/designer/programmer of Yom Al-Deen "a little of my own&quot

Surah 1142

What is for you, the mental confusion?
(Controller/Owner/designer/programmer of Al-Naas)

"Please make a note here, both Arabic text's are just copy and pasted from your website's/post and yet you have written this word "Malik" differently you have separated Maa from liki in 14 and kept it together in 1142 but in all prints of Al-Quran i have, this is not the case, please keep the consistancy. As it has been kept for centuries.

Mr.Pervez's Lughat-ul-Quran do not agree with your meaning of (Mental confusion) as there, the root words are not (Noon, Wao, Seen) but they are (Alif, noon, seen) "ANS", meaning's, "domesticated" as oppose to "Wehshat' Junglee". Ibne Faris says the meaning of ANS is to come apparent, appear in the open as oppose to being hidden JIN.

ANS meanings are also to see and feel as in Hazart Moosa's Story (277, 2010).

4520 says Al-Qur-aan is "Haza Basairu-Le-Al-Naas" could only mean that it is Baseerat, Hidayaa, for Le-Al-Naas. or as you have been saying Baseerat, Hidaya from mental confusion. Still need to see your refrence in Lane, thats at home, will confirm your Anal-Y-sis.

ASAP.

Word at both places is differently spelled. At first place it has a dagger aleph.

In Urdu
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/book%20tafseer/114/TAFSEER%20001/slides/01.jpg
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/book%20tafseer/114/TAFSEER%20001/slides/02.jpg

Continue

http//haqeeqat.org.pk/book%20tafseer/114/TAFSEER%20001/slides/03.html

ayyub

Dear brother Badar,

Salaam.

Please explain the difference in 14 Malik of Yom Al Deen and 1142 Malik Al-Naas.

Why would you translate and write this word, Malik - differently in one place then the other.

Surah 14

which is with you at all times, for you to follow.
(Controller/Owner/designer/programmer of Yom Al-Deen "a little of my own&quot

Surah 1142

What is for you, the mental confusion?
(Controller/Owner/designer/programmer of Al-Naas)

"Please make a note here, both Arabic text's are just copy and pasted from your website's/post and yet you have written this word "Malik" differently you have separated Maa from liki in 14 and kept it together in 1142 but in all prints of Al-Quran i have, this is not the case, please keep the consistancy. As it has been kept for centuries.

Mr.Pervez's Lughat-ul-Quran do not agree with your meaning of (Mental confusion) as there, the root words are not (Noon, Wao, Seen) but they are (Alif, noon, seen) "ANS", meaning's, "domesticated" as oppose to "Wehshat' Junglee". Ibne Faris says the meaning of ANS is to come apparent, appear in the open as oppose to being hidden JIN.

ANS meanings are also to see and feel as in Hazart Moosa's Story (277, 2010).

4520 says Al-Qur-aan is "Haza Basairu-Le-Al-Naas" could only mean that it is Baseerat, Hidayaa, for Le-Al-Naas. or as you have been saying Baseerat, Hidaya from mental confusion. Still need to see your refrence in Lane, thats at home, will confirm your Anal-Y-sis.

ASAP.

You make a good point, because I feel there is connection between Surah 1 and 114, if you are going to change one, you might as well change the other which is one of the reasons why I believe Mankind to be more accurate.

bkanwar2

Dear brother Badar,

Salaam.

Please explain the difference in 14 Malik of Yom Al Deen and 1142 Malik Al-Naas.

Why would you translate and write this word, Malik - differently in one place then the other.

Surah 14

which is with you at all times, for you to follow.
(Controller/Owner/designer/programmer of Yom Al-Deen "a little of my own&quot

Surah 1142

What is for you, the mental confusion?
(Controller/Owner/designer/programmer of Al-Naas)

"Please make a note here, both Arabic text's are just copy and pasted from your website's/post and yet you have written this word "Malik" differently you have separated Maa from liki in 14 and kept it together in 1142 but in all prints of Al-Quran i have, this is not the case, please keep the consistancy. As it has been kept for centuries.

Mr.Pervez's Lughat-ul-Quran do not agree with your meaning of (Mental confusion) as there, the root words are not (Noon, Wao, Seen) but they are (Alif, noon, seen) "ANS", meaning's, "domesticated" as oppose to "Wehshat' Junglee". Ibne Faris says the meaning of ANS is to come apparent, appear in the open as oppose to being hidden JIN.

ANS meanings are also to see and feel as in Hazart Moosa's Story (277, 2010).

4520 says Al-Qur-aan is "Haza Basairu-Le-Al-Naas" could only mean that it is Baseerat, Hidayaa, for Le-Al-Naas. or as you have been saying Baseerat, Hidaya from mental confusion. Still need to see your refrence in Lane, thats at home, will confirm your Anal-Y-sis.

ASAP.

Dear Nadir, thanks for asking these questions. I feel so much better that my efforts are bring back people to the message, my real purpose of life now.
I am going to promise that I will address all your concerns. But you need to make a promise as well. Please verify whatever information, I provide you. Please neither believe blindly nor reject based upon preconceived notions and whims.

These two verses are not typed by my. In fact these are cut and past from Quran available from openburhan site and are written as such. Please follow the link to verify.

http//www.openburhan.com/

Why this is so? Please remember the original text was preserved as a hand written document and continued as such for a long time. This was done by humans like you and me; only until recently, when printing facility became available. There are issues regarding script as well but, I shall leave that for a later time. This in order not to complicate the answer too much.
Now coming to issue of phrase in question. . Or . this is combination of Particle , preposition and personal pronoun . The particle could be legitmatly written as only , hence in script both these are one and same (Wright vol 1 page 274 rem c).
could mean; which, what, that & whatever. Please remember, by definition particle's meanings are dependent upon context of sentence.(Wright vol 1. page 270-71)
The preposition means; for, to & on account (Wright, vol 1. page 356). In addition this preposition is also one of that it gives a kesra or jerr to following noun. Which is Ka here (Easy Arabic Grammar by Lutaf ur Rehman vol 1 page 89.)
Finally, this phrase is written in Wolfdietrich Fischer book as such with meaning and understanding used in my translation, instead of it's traditional meanings. I shall give you the reference page later. As this book is at home. But reference is below.
Finally, I am providing links below for easy of verification.

Peace.

Badar

http//yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/book.asp?isbn=0300084374
http//www.ghazali.org/arabic/WrightArabicGrammarVol1.pdf
http//www.archive.org/details/EasyArabicGrammar1Of3-Urdu

kn

You say we need to find the real meaning, that could end up being the original understanding. Sure we don't know until we check, but there is nothing wrong with ending up at the original.

Fully agree with above. Wish more and more people do that.

Dear Nadir, thanks for asking these questions. I feel so much better that my efforts are bring back people to the message, my real purpose of life now.
I am going to promise that I will address all your concerns. But you need to make a promise as well. Please verify whatever information, I provide you. Please neither believe blindly nor reject based upon preconceived notions and whims.

These two verses are not typed by my. In fact these are cut and past from Quran available from openburhan site and are written as such. Please follow the link to verify.

http//www.openburhan.com/

Why this is so? Please remember the original text was preserved as a hand written document and continued as such for a long time. This was done by humans like you and me; only until recently, when printing facility became available. There are issues regarding script as well but, I shall leave that for a later time. This in order not to complicate the answer too much.
Now coming to issue of phrase in question. . Or . this is combination of Particle , preposition and personal pronoun . The particle could be legitmatly written as only , hence in script both these are one and same (Wright vol 1 page 274 rem c).
could mean; which, what, that & whatever. Please remember, by definition particle's meanings are dependent upon context of sentence.(Wright vol 1. page 270-71)
The preposition means; for, to & on account (Wright, vol 1. page 356). In addition this preposition is also one of that it gives a kesra or jerr to following noun. Which is Ka here (Easy Arabic Grammar by Lutaf ur Rehman vol 1 page 89.)
Finally, this phrase is written in Wolfdietrich Fischer book as such with meaning and understanding used in my translation, instead of it's traditional meanings. I shall give you the reference page later. As this book is at home. But reference is below.
Finally, I am providing links below for easy of verification.

Peace.

Badar

http//yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/book.asp?isbn=0300084374
http//www.ghazali.org/arabic/WrightArabicGrammarVol1.pdf
http//www.archive.org/details/EasyArabicGrammar1Of3-Urdu

Scholarly discussion will bring us the real meaning, some of which may be new because of better understanding and some will be same and similar as always. The purpose should be scholarly cross referencing and verification of all quoted sources by several individuals, with full honesty and eagerness.

Peace

Mazhar

Now coming to issue of phrase in question. . Or . this is combination of Particle , preposition and personal pronoun . The particle could be legitmatly written as only , hence in script both these are one and same (Wright vol 1 page 274 rem c).
could mean; which, what, that & whatever. Please remember, by definition particle's meanings are dependent upon context of sentence.(Wright vol 1. page 270-71)
The preposition means; for, to & on account (Wright, vol 1. page 356). In addition this preposition is also one of that it gives a kesra or jerr to following noun. Which is Ka here (Easy Arabic Grammar by Lutaf ur Rehman vol 1 page 89.)

Pronoun of second person masculine "Ka" does not accept Kasra. When the second person is feminine, it carries Kasra.

bkanwar2

Pronoun of second person masculine "Ka" does not accept Kasra. When the second person is feminine, it carries Kasra.

Peace, referance please, for the statement. Rule, I know that "Lee" is one of the "Huruf e Jarre" which means when these combine with other nouns. These give or change noun's irrab to Jerr. Thereby making Jerre Compounds or in Arabic . I shall learn more, if you would kindly provide a referance to your claim.

Badar

Mazhar

Peace, referance please, for the statement. Rule, I know that "Lee" is one of the "Huruf e Jarre" which means when these combine with other nouns. These give or change noun's irrab to Jerr. Thereby making Jerre Compounds or in Arabic . I shall learn more, if you would kindly provide a referance to your claim.

Badar

Dear you are an advanced student, yet you are asking me question about elementary lesson of declension.