Linguistic riddle solved, for those who want to learn
-
Sounds like Wicca. Same exact principle.
That is my friend Abdun Nur's thought process. I do not think that I can agree or disagree based upon limited linguistic understanding of Quran at this time. However, he is one of those blessed person, who underststood Allah as "One who is not a deity for worship" before, I understood the concept through language.
You may like to ask him this question at his website.
http//www.servantofthelight.com/
-
Dear All,salam
Let me tell you my take about who is Allah? In sura 112 there is a arbic word,"SAMAD" and one of its popular meanings is,"ONE THAT DOES NOT NEED ANYTHING FROM ANYBODY,BUT EVERYBODY NEED EVERYTHING FROM HIM".So his worship etc.is to follow the natural rules that you think are correct to the best of your knowledge.Then on the day of audit if anything you did is found to be wrong,then He is there to forgive you.So no need to take any tension just do every thing rightfully and that is all.thanks.
-
By the way, the write up/break down of so to called word/noun, Allah, has been on this forum and several others for over 2 years. I hate to use word challenge, but it is like a linguistic challenge from Quran and its language. There has been no objection to it except for one that is already addressed in this link; citing its use, both in language and current translation of Quran, as well, from books of the language with due references.
Salaam brother,
The refutation is 5922
5922Both ALLAH and "allathee la ilaha" are used in one sentence one after the other.
Ok maybe you will say that "allathee la ilaha" defines the meaning of the word ALLAH, but then we must do this trick also to other instances in The Quran.
For example
9217
9218
Thus "Allathee yutee malahu yatazakka" defines the meaning of the word "alatqa" and we can split the word "alatqa" in 4 parts Allathee, yutee, malahu and yatazakka.Salaam,
Bender -
Dear Brother, due lack of time let me decode this verse and give the real meanings of only part of it, which is in red.
5922
"He is one who is not a deity for worship. Who does not at all belong to genus/species of deity for worship."
The first illah is in Rafa, the second one is in Nasab. The later would indicate that the second "La" is a La e NafeeAljins. Which means that such "la" denies each and everything or concept belonging to its genus/species.
How more strongly and vigorously do we want our Rabb to deny a concept of an illah i.e., a deity for worship than this denial?
-
Dear Brother, due lack of time let me decode this verse and give the real meanings of only part of it, which is in red.
5922
"He is one who is not a deity for worship. Who does not at all belong to genus/species of deity for worship."
The first illah is in Rafa, the second one is in Nasab. The later would indicate that the second "La" is a La e NafeeAljins. Which means that such "la" denies each and everything or concept belonging to its genus/species.
How more strongly and vigorously do we want our Rabb to deny a concept of an illah i.e., a deity for worship than this denial?
Salaam bkanwar2,
A couple of things
-- Do you think Allah was not capable of doing what you did? If He wanted to split that word in parts, it would be very easy form Him, don't you think?
-- In one of your topics you discussed this "Is it correct/okay to use Quranic verses out of context of full verses?"
So why did you stop in the middle of a sentence?-- Your definition of an ilah which is "deity for worship" is not Quranic. In one of our early discussions you told me it's a definition given by religious, philosphers and scholars. This is not how it works brother nope
Why not "The moon deity"? This is also a defintion given for Allah by those who don't know. Or why not any other definition given by men? With other words what is your Quranic proof for your definition?It looks to me that if you want to insert something to your definition of Allah then the red part of the next verse is for sure better then yours
2014-- I have zero knowledge about arabic grammar bro, I don't know what "rafa" and "nasab" and "NafeeAljins" means.
But if we want to be creative then we can make of 5922 something like thiswe have the same structure in 2088
2088
so we have to understand "Allahu Allaha" in the same way as "Wa-ilahu Musa". But I can not see this in your translation.btw I agree totally with you that 5922 says
"He is Allah who is not an illah..."
But I think we have also to translate at least the next 2 words, thus
"He is Allah who is not an illah, except He..."
Can you give me 1 ayaat where this "ILLA" is missing?I also like to know why you did not the same trick to "HUWA" (the first word)
HU = He
WA = and
Are there some special rules for this splitting of words?Salaam,
Benderps. maybe it's better not to give verse numbers for verses which are not from The Quran. Some people might think that it's from The Quran.
-
-- Do you think Allah was not capable of doing what you did? If He wanted to split that word in parts, it would be very easy form Him, don't you think?
Dear Brother do you think or believe that the book Quran as we have today was written by Allah himself? It was not, it was written by people like you and me. They wrote it according to the rules of their language, just like every one writes his/her language.
Are there some special rules for this splitting of words?
Yes my brother these rules are given in the write up above. Please pay attention to it. Please try to read rules of Shadda from link given for Wiiliam Wright.
Regards
-
Dear Brother do you think or believe that the book Quran as we have today was written by Allah himself? It was not, it was written by people like you and me. They wrote it according to the rules of their language, just like every one writes his/her language.
17.88 Say "If the whole of mankind and Jinns were to gather together to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they backed up each other with help and support.
11.13 Or they may say, "He forged it," Say, "Bring ye then ten suras forged, like unto it, and call (to your aid) whomsoever ye can, other than Allah!- If ye speak the truth!
10.38 Or do they say, "He forged it"? say "Bring then a Sura like unto it, and call (to your aid) anyone you can besides Allah, if it be ye speak the truth!"
223-24 And if ye are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to Our servant, then produce a Sura like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers (If there are any) besides Allah, if your (doubts) are true. But if ye cannot- and of a surety ye cannot- then fear the Fire whose fuel is men and stones,- which is prepared for those who reject Faith.
peace
-
Peace,
Worth noticing is that there are people here who still think these are the words of God that Muhammad wrote down. That includes me.
But I respect those who have a different opinion about that.
Unless I get something solid to prove the Quran to be just a man-made fabrication I will continue to believe it is the only uncorrupted words from God, but my mind is always open to reform. My world would be seriously shaken up if the Quran proved to be man-made conjecture and, God willing, it is not the case.
May God show us the light
-
Peace All.
It is also worth noting that there are those who are " Certain" , beyond any doubt, that the author of the Qoran is God.
4142 No falsehood could enter it in the past or in the future; ( preserved for all future generations!) A revelation from a Most Wise, Praiseworthy.?
Peace.
-
Peace good logic,
It was basically what I meant. Certain, as long as no one can prove me the opposite, which I honestly doubt. I am certain and I have no doubt.
My mind is made up, but I am never impossible. But there is simply no probability that one can convince me the Quran is not authentic. I am a man of faith, o brother, but I am also a man of logic.
Also if there are any claimed errors in the Quran, they are likely to be misinterpretations.
Peace bro' !
-
No linguistic objections so far. The point in discussion is that Quran is a book, as we define in current understanding. It is written in certain language by humans like us. I am presenting the understanding of this book based upon the rules of written language. Which is completely different than current translation. Hence, defenders of current translation; who by no means can be considered as defender of the real Quran, need to bring linguistic argument that current translation and understanding is correct. Instead of bringing more mis translated vereses.
Please, bring your linguistic arguments, in order to defend that the current translation of this word under discussion is" Al Illah" or "the god" or "the deity for worship". Why it is written as , instead of ? The later should be the spelling, if current translation and understanding is correct, not the former spellings.
Regards
-
Dear Brother do you think or believe that the book Quran as we have today was written by Allah himself? It was not, it was written by people like you and me. They wrote it according to the rules of their language, just like every one writes his/her language.
Salaam bro,
RED nope
BLUE Quranic proof svp
Who ever wrote it down it was for sure with permission of Allah.
Furthermore, besides the written text of The Quran we have also the audio of The Quran. Your text does not fit the audio and therefore contradicts 1037. But I am afraid you have mistranslated 1037 in such away that your theory still holds.Yes my brother these rules are given in the write up above. Please pay attention to it. Please try to read rules of Shadda from link given for Wiiliam Wright.
RegardsBrother in the other thread I was and still am happy to learn from you but on 1 condition, that is, that you will teach me your understandings with verses from The Quran to support your claims.
I am not allowed to follow Bukahry or Wiiliam Wright or Lexicon etc to understand The Quran. I hope I am clear now with what I meant there. If your basis for your theories/definitions/etc are from Wiiliam Wright or lexicons or any other source besides The Book we call The Quran then we have no basis for our discussion.364
but like before I am afraid that the teachings of Wiiliam Wright gave you also other understandings on this verse.
Salaam,
Bender -
Bro are you saying that current translation of Quran is the real meanings of Quranic text? If your answer is yes. There is nothing further to discuss between us.
If you also agree that current understanding of Quran based upon a translation of Quran several hundred years after its origin was done by people other than prophet or his companions. In this case, what method you would you use to confirm, if this understanding is in fact, what original text says?
-
Bro are you saying that current translation of Quran is the real meanings of Quranic text? If your answer is yes. There is nothing further to discuss between us.
If you also agree that current understanding of Quran based upon a translation of Quran several hundred years after its origin was done by people other than prophet or his companions. In this case, what method you would you use to confirm, if this understanding is in fact, what original text says?
Salaam brother,
What do you mean with the current translation of Quran?
Salaam,
Bender -
No linguistic objections so far. The point in discussion is that Quran is a book, as we define in current understanding. It is written in certain language by humans like us. I am presenting the understanding of this book based upon the rules of written language. Which is completely different than current translation. Hence, defenders of current translation; who by no means can be considered as defender of the real Quran, need to bring linguistic argument that current translation and understanding is correct. Instead of bringing more mis translated vereses.
Please, bring your linguistic arguments, in order to defend that the current translation of this word under discussion is" Al Illah" or "the god" or "the deity for worship". Why it is written as , instead of ? The later should be the spelling, if current translation and understanding is correct, not the former spellings.
Regards
How would your definition of Allah be consistent with the following ?
(114)
-
How would your definition of Allah be consistent with the following ?
(114)
Of course He is God, but perhaps the word "worship" should not be used, "to honor" would be better, and LOVE God, with the idea that we submit heart, soul, and body, to His Divine Laws, which we all already do, willingly or unwillingly, because there is only God and God is running everything! )
Is there ever anything at all, but God? ???
peace
-
Salaam brother,
What do you mean with the current translation of Quran?
Salaam,
BenderWhat believers and non believers alike accept as real Quran and Quranic concepts are based upon a translation done few hundred years after its original writting. This translation is mostly based upon Hadith/History. So if you claim not to accept hadith, how come you are accepting this translation as real Quran?
Regards
-
What believers and non believers alike accept as real Quran and Quranic concepts are based upon a translation done few hundred years after its original writting. This translation is mostly based upon Hadith/History. So if you claim not to accept hadith, how come you are accepting this translation as real Quran?
Regards
Salaam brother,
I am stil not sure what you are talking about. Are you talking about the arabic text/sound of The Quran or the translations? Do you mean the arabic text/sound of The Quran is a translation?
Salaam,
Bender