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. new article - Quranic terms defined

new article - Quranic terms defined

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Questions/Comments on the Quran
403 Posts 17 Posters 26.6k 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.
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    Mazhar
    wrote on last edited by
    #301

    Quote from Mazhar on Today at 090652 PM
    .

    A pronoun in a subordinate phrase is translated by "he" or "you" for any noun other than Allah. But in "sahibukum" the pronoun is "kum" denoting "you people" but the first word is not a pronoun but a definite noun, the subject. And the definite noun in a possessive phrase has to be written with capital letter.

    RUBBISH! -Ayisha

    Have you compiled a new grammer book which declares the above as RUBBISH? In English I may say "your father" which denotes none but a specific person, and means "The Father of you". In Arabic I do not find a phrase "your father" but "The Father of you" described by a possessive phrase.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • A Offline
      A Offline
      Ayisha
      wrote on last edited by
      #302

      Have you compiled a new grammer book which declares the above as RUBBISH? In English I may say "your father" which denotes none but a specific person, and means "The Father of you". In Arabic I do not find a phrase "your father" but "The Father of you" described by a possessive phrase.

      NO, The father of you. NOT a capital letter for father unless it is the Father GOD

      It did not say Guiding Lord in the Arabic text! Do you understand this Mazhar or are you again playing stupid? IT DID NOT SAY IT.

      there is not Rabb or Hadi in that verse, NONE and YOU put it there and YOU made Muhammed into GOD.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • M Offline
        M Offline
        Mazhar
        wrote on last edited by
        #303

        NO, The father of you. NOT a capital letter for father unless it is the Father GOD

        It did not say Guiding Lord in the Arabic text! Do you understand this Mazhar or are you again playing stupid? IT DID NOT SAY IT.

        there is not Rabb or Hadi in that verse, NONE and YOU put it there and YOU made Muhammed into GOD.

        yes, The itself specifies the particular person who is being referred as father. So in "Guiding Lord" the word Lord should be with small "l" as "Guiding lord". You think "sahibu" means companion. In that case, it would "The companion of you people". In that case would you not like to object that how can he be our companion since he is dead, since common meanings of companion is somebody who shares time with another.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • A Offline
          A Offline
          Ayisha
          wrote on last edited by
          #304

          yes, The itself specifies the particular person who is being referred as father. So in "Guiding Lord" the word Lord should be with small "l" as "Guiding lord". You think "sahibu" means companion. In that case, it would "The companion of you people". In that case would you not like to object that how can he be our companion since he is dead, since common meanings of companion is somebody who shares time with another.

          ???

          Guiding lord with a small 'l' would only have capital 'G' if the word Guiding was at the beginning which it was NOWHERE IN THAT VERSE AT ALL

          The verse was revealed to Muhammed when he was alive as you well know!

          You have NO WAY to justify what you have done and keep back tracking and dancing about like a child to try to justify or cover it up!

          IT IS NOT IN THAT VERSE and no amount of you playing childish games with language will make it in that verse.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • R Offline
            R Offline
            Raaajah
            wrote on last edited by
            #305

            the word 'SaHib' also means
            in case of all Muslims - it would be master/lord; Land lord =
            in case of contemporaries it may be "Companion"

            and if you insists on "Companion" then you have to believe in which you don't want to, Ayisha.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • W Offline
              W Offline
              WayFinder
              wrote on last edited by
              #306

              Peace

              I have taken big patience and time to go through the thread... initially it was good with the quranic terms etc by Wakas but later on it degraded and kept degrading ... I have been absent from the forum for some time ... I see a lot of change in the attitude of some brothers... especially Mazhar.. Brother Mazhar.. please do not get me wrong... But I see a lot of boasting/arrogance due to your mastery of arabic to some extent... I never knew you like this before and it is indeed a shocker for me when I read your replies... You should revert back to your old attitude of the humble learner and sharer of knowledge... It was lots better for all of us here...

              There are quite a few things which I disagree with you such as verb always coming before noun in arabic... which is false as it depends on the sentence... however, this would not override the subject of the verb in either case... I also do not agree with you the Muhammad (pbuh) will be the intercessor and everyone will be running to him as if he will hold the key to paradise on that day... this concept is purely jewish/christian.

              I also cannot understand why each time you are asked to translate which you first stated in Reply #39 of this thread, you are always translating verse 3356 (reply #72) which according to me does not make any sense... since the phrase cannot be found in 3356. Basically, everyone has been asking you to translate the CUSTOM phrase which you attach each time you write/say the name of Muhammad(pbuh) which is ] ... NO ONE asked you for translation of verse 3356. I hope I am being very clear here. Now allow me to ask you this

              1. Is the phrase as it is, that is verbatim, present in the quran? If not, therefore it is unquranic
              2. If the phrase is not in quran, then tell us where it comes from/origin
              3. Please translate THE PHRASE exactly as you wrote it , word-by-word, then in a good sentence using proper english. NOTE Do not translate verse 3356 again.

              I hope you will take this post into consideration with a positive mindset... I am not attacking you in any form... I am just requesting some clarification and I hope you will shed some light on it.

              Thank you

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • A Offline
                A Offline
                Ayisha
                wrote on last edited by
                #307

                the word 'SaHib' also means
                in case of all Muslims - it would be master/lord; Land lord =
                in case of contemporaries it may be "Companion"

                so in this verse what does it man Raj? What does sahibukum mean in this verse? Does it mean 'your companion' 'your landlord' or 'that Guiding Lord'

                and if you insists on "Companion" then you have to believe in which you don't want to, Ayisha.

                and what is it, in your opinion, that you think I will 'have to believe' in that I 'dont want to believe in' Raj?

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • M Offline
                  M Offline
                  Mazhar
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #308

                  I also cannot understand why each time you are asked to translate "and you pay salutations, obeisance" reiterating the command of Allah to all of us, the believers alone, to pay him salutations, respects, obeisance, goodwill.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • W Offline
                    W Offline
                    WayFinder
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #309

                    Perhaps you have not gone through the whole of thread otherwise at least you would have noticed that I did translate it.

                    This is sort of transliteration with the help of talking dictionary to produce the same sound as is built in/produced by Arabic sentence .

                    The first part is reiteration in our own words what is stated in the Ayat. The second part is imperative asking my reader "and you pay salutations, obeisance" reiterating the command of Allah to all of us, the believers alone, to pay him salutations, respects, obeisance, goodwill.

                    Bear with me... I read the whole thread and it took me more than an hour to do so...

                    Please answer my question in chronological order if you don't mind... it will be much helpful.

                    Thank you

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • M Offline
                      M Offline
                      Mazhar
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #310

                      I also do not agree with you the Muhammad (pbuh) will be the intercessor and everyone will be running to him as if he will hold the key to paradise on that day... this concept is purely jewish/christian.

                      Would you like to oblige me with your translation of that Ayat so that I may find whether I have wrongly translated the words of Qur'aan?

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • M Offline
                        M Offline
                        Mazhar
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #311

                        I never knew you like this before and it is indeed a shocker for me when I read your replies... You should revert back to your old attitude of the humble learner and sharer of knowledge...

                        And did you not smell any bad odor in those remarks which were replied?

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • M Offline
                          M Offline
                          Mazhar
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #312

                          There are quite a few things which I disagree with you such as verb always coming before noun in arabic... which is false as it depends on the sentence... however, this would not override the subject of the verb in either case...

                          I have even explained two types of sentences. The point is that subject of the verb comes after the verb otherwise in its absence the subject will be considered hidden in the verb and could refer back to the subject of the sentence as is the case in 5501. Have you said anything different from this in your red part?

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • M Offline
                            M Offline
                            Mazhar
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #313

                            ???

                            Guiding lord with a small 'l' would only have capital 'G' if the word Guiding was at the beginning which it was NOWHERE IN THAT VERSE AT ALL

                            The verse was revealed to Muhammed when he was alive as you well know!

                            You have NO WAY to justify what you have done and keep back tracking and dancing about like a child to try to justify or cover it up!

                            IT IS NOT IN THAT VERSE and no amount of you playing childish games with language will make it in that verse.

                            Is this too not there which you are not attending

                            "The companion of you people". In that case would you not like to object that how can he be our companion since he is dead, since common meanings of companion is somebody who shares time with another.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • W Offline
                              W Offline
                              WayFinder
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #314

                              I have even explained two types of sentences. The point is that subject of the verb comes after the verb otherwise in its absence the subject will be considered hidden in the verb and could refer back to the subject of the sentence as is the case in 5501. Have you said anything different from this in your red part?

                              In our case, the verb is clearly referring to the subject which comes before the verb... therefore, we cannot formulate a rigid rule that subject should always come after the verb.. what we can say is that, generally, it is like this... but it is not a rule.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • M Offline
                                M Offline
                                Mazhar
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #315

                                In our case, the verb is clearly referring to the subject which comes before the verb... therefore, we cannot formulate a rigid rule that subject should always come after the verb.. what we can say is that, generally, it is like this... but it is not a rule.

                                Would you like to quote an instance from Grand Quraan.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • W Offline
                                  W Offline
                                  WayFinder
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #316

                                  Would you like to quote an instance from Grand Quraan.

                                  551-2 itself

                                  Verse 7113 is a good example as well where the subject comes before the verb referring back to the

                                  http//c0022506.cdn1.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/7_113.png

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • A Offline
                                    A Offline
                                    Ayisha
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #317

                                    Is this too not there which you are not attending

                                    "The companion of you people". In that case would you not like to object that how can he be our companion since he is dead, since common meanings of companion is somebody who shares time with another.

                                    More evasive tactics mazhar.

                                    The verse, as you know, was telling the companions/people sharing the same time and space, which were there with him at this time that this verse was being recited telling them that he (their companion/he that is with them at this time) is not crazy etc for seeing what he saw.

                                    You have used 'companion' in your translation of 2.39 and 2.82 but not 2.81 where you have used residents/inmates for the very same word. In 2.119 you have used dwellers. in 2.217 companions, in 2.257 companions, in 2.275 back to residents/inmates, in 3.116 companions, in 4.36 companion.

                                    I think I don't need more to make the point that when sahib is used in 6 of the 9 verses above, you use companion, in 2 you use inmates and in 1 you use dwellers but when it says 'YOUR companion' you have used the same, Guiding Lord.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • R Offline
                                      R Offline
                                      Raaajah
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #318

                                      Ayisha

                                      and what is it, in your opinion, that you think I will 'have to believe' in that I 'dont want to believe in' Raj?

                                      If you take as companion, you have to believe that, he is still here, because you and me are still reading this verse.
                                      Off course you will revert back to your same argument "this verse was for that time" and I will ask you again the same question then why not remove it? However we will have to depend on your intelligentsia to pick and chose the verses.

                                      Way Finder

                                      I see a lot of change in the attitude of some brothers... especially Mazhar.. Brother Mazhar.. please do not get me wrong... But I see a lot of boasting/arrogance due to your mastery of arabic to some extent.

                                      By reading these remarks by one who has followed this thread through out can easily assume these are biased comments. Your admitting that Mazhar did not had same attitude before confirms, there was a reason for it, and sadly you were not able to see the reason.

                                      And your saying that there is change in Mazhar's attitude along with some brother's, and not of Sister, made it confirm that she is this way from the beginning.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • A Offline
                                        A Offline
                                        Ayisha
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #319

                                        Ayisha
                                        If you take as companion, you have to believe that, he is still here, because you and me are still reading this verse.
                                        Off course you will revert back to your same argument "this verse was for that time" and I will ask you again the same question then why not remove it? However we will have to depend on your intelligentsia to pick and chose the verses.
                                        sahibukum, in that word can you find 'hadi' or Rabb? Simple question Raj

                                        Way Finder

                                        And your saying that there is change in Mazhar's attitude along with some brother's, and not of Sister, made it confirm that she is this way from the beginning.

                                        Yes from the beginning if I see illogical things or a complete distortion of God's Book to the point it blatantly contradicts itself, then I will keep saying so and asking questions which from the beginning I still have no answers to and have been told I am mushrik, foolish among various other wonderful things.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • W Offline
                                          W Offline
                                          WayFinder
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #320

                                          Brother Mazhar

                                          You owe me a reply for the post below. Where are you?

                                          551-2 itself

                                          Verse 7113 is a good example as well where the subject comes before the verb referring back to the

                                          http//c0022506.cdn1.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/7_113.png

                                          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