God?s words are not subjected to our dictionaries

Wakas

peace IMHO,

It seems you are implying some free-minds forum members use dictionaries with applying "common sense", or other techniques in addition to selecting the literal meaning. If so, I have very rarely seen this, perhaps you know something I dont.

And you seem to imply there is confusion regarding 43, can you clarify or quote what this confusion is?

Your translation of yatama/yatim as "vulnerable" is flawed, as shown by 4127

They ask you for divine instruction concerning women. Say, "God instructs you regarding them, as has been recited for you in the book about the women orphans who you want to marry without giving them what has been ordained/written for them, as well as the weak/powerless children, and stand for orphans with equity. Whatever good you do, God has full knowledge of it.

IMHO

Man, how you going to talk about the Quran and bring up the English DICTIONARY?
With a smile on your face.
The book was written by a human being.
Tell me your mind is free....

My simpls merekat wink is for the brillent minds on free minds not the Quran,
-, simpls

IMHO

peace IMHO,

It seems you are implying some free-minds forum members use dictionaries with applying "common sense", or other techniques in addition to selecting the literal meaning. If so, I have very rarely seen this, perhaps you know something I dont.

And you seem to imply there is confusion regarding 43, can you clarify or quote what this confusion is?

Your translation of yatama/yatim as "vulnerable" is flawed, as shown by 4127

They ask you for divine instruction concerning women. Say, "God instructs you regarding them, as has been recited for you in the book about the women orphans who you want to marry without giving them what has been ordained/written for them, as well as the weak/powerlI mean in arabic language as welless children, and stand for orphans with equity. Whatever good you do, God has full knowledge of it.

Salaam
How does tranlating it as vurnable women makes it flawed ? Don?t you see the difference between weak and powerless children and vurnable women both words used in the Quran are most appropriates simppls

Kaiokenred

I'm glad someone except me thinks we should also use common sense

ramzi

Salaam IMHO,

Yes, I agree. I posted a similar comment in the 'Hot/Ramadan' thread when a forum member stated that 'Ramadan is a proper noun and as a rule of thumb you do not translate proper nouns'.

Adnan Rifai has written a book called 'The Grand Miracle' and in it he proves that the quran belongs to the 'dimension of the spirit' or 'world of the spirit/order/commandment' and NOT the 'dimension of creation' or 'world of creation'.

There is the dimension of God and His attributes, under that is the dimension of Al-Amr , and under that is the dimension of creation, Al-khalq

754

To comprehend this, one has to look at the gradual evolution of the 'Message' sent by God. As humans advanced through time, so did the 'Message' sent by God. The 'Message' started off in the form of miracles that were concentrated in the prophets. As time passed, and with advances in human thought, God sent down the 'Book' and miracles with his prophets - e.g. Moses with the Ten Commandments - Torah. As God sent Moses to the Pharaoh, He gave him miracles such as turning his shepherd stick into a snake. This baffled the Pharoah's magicians who knew their magic was only trickery and eye illusions. Upon seeing Moses's magic they submitted to the one God and stopped worshipping the Pharaoh.

Jesus was the same, a 'Message' - the Bible and miracles - healing the sick, raising the dead, miraculous birth if you like......

Moses was sent to the Pharaoh, Jesus to the people of Israel, Mohammed to All Mankind. Therefore, the miracle of the final message must not be attached to the prophet in any way for it to be fit for all mankind. And this is the final 'upgrade'/evolution in the 'Message'. The final message and miracle were completely detached from the prophet and concentrated in the Book (Quran). In doing this, it is completely detached from history and valid for anyone at any time until the Day of Judgement.

As such, the quran is a miracle and not subject to the laws of the world/dimension of creation.

Adnan Rifai has proven that each letter in the quran is a miracle. To provide a bit of background, the idea of the 'letter' being the basic structure for the miracle came from Chapter 71 - Noah, . It is made up of 950 letters and forms the basis for classifying what constitutes a letter and what doesn't in the quran (there is concern whether the hamza, , is counted as a letter). Chapter 71 - Noah is the only chapter to talk about one prophet from start to finish. And Noah lived for 950 years, as stated in the quran. Therefore Adnan realised that the letters hold something key to understanding the miracle. He hit the answer circa 1994 when he listed the Arabic letters based on their number of occurrences in the quran. So the letter that is mentioned most is given the number/'value' 1 and the letter that has the 2nd highest number of occurrences is given the number/'value' 2 and so on.

It turns out that

= 1
= 2
= 3
= 4

and so on... till

= 28

being the least used letter in the quran.

And thus each letter has its value.

According to this he shows a mathematical code in the quran (surprisingly the basis for this mathematical code has nothing to do with code 19, but applying the numbers to verses and sentences reveals a law based on the prime number 19. It has nothing to do with adding verse numbers, word counts and chapter numbers. And it also has nothing to do with adding the number of letters, but rather the value of each letter)

For example

Mohamad
= 4 + 18 + 4 + 16 = 42

And

Rasool Allah
= 8 + 15 + 5 + 2 + 1 + 2 + 2 + 7 = 42

Adnan Rifai found a law in the quran
For 2 quranic texts that have the same meaning/indications, their letter value must be equal.

For example
156
They say "O thou to whom the Message is being revealed! truly thou art mad (or possessed)!

= 219

5229
Therefore proclaim thou the praises (of thy Lord) for by the Grace of thy Lord, thou art no (vulgar) soothsayer, nor art thou one possessed.

= 219

This raises the issue on the writing of
It is and not

For example

2739-40
Said an Ifrit, of the Jinns "I will bring it to thee before thou rise from thy council indeed I have full strength for the purpose, and may be trusted."

Said one who had knowledge of the Book "I will bring it to thee within the twinkling of an eye!" Then when (Solomon) saw it placed firmly before him, he said "This is by the Grace of my Lord!- to test me whether I am grateful or ungrateful! and if any is grateful, truly his gratitude is (a gain) for his own soul; but if any is ungrateful, truly my Lord is Free of all Needs, Supreme in Honour !"

We find that the 2 sentences below offer the respective Jinns best ability (in bringing her throne)
Said an Ifrit, of the Jinns "I will bring it to thee before thou rise from thy council indeed I have full strength for the purpose, and may be trusted."

= 334

And

Said one who had knowledge of the Book "I will bring it to thee within the twinkling of an eye!"

= 334

Another example The letter value of a word has a relation to its meaning and is not just a random number generated by the sum of the value of its letters. For example it is known that Eissa is distinguished (unique) from all other human beings by being created from (lit. the spirit) and that he spoke using (injeel).

4171
O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him so believe in Allah and His messengers. Say not "Trinity" desist it will be better for you for Allah is one Allah Glory be to Him (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs.

Therefore we see that the letter value for these 3 words is the same

= 34
= 34
= 34

Also, we know that the quran is the only book that contains Allahs spoken words. All books are from Allah but the quran is unique in containing the spoken word of Allah. Therefore we see that

= 29
= 29

The quran is a miracle and does not belong to the world of creation. The language of the quran sets the standard for grammar and use of words in the world of creation, and the opposite is not true. The quran is not subject to the rules and definitions set by the world of creation.

Wakas

peace IMHO,

By quoting 4127 I was highlighting the following

it implies there is some sort of stipulation in the book regarding vulnerable women and giving something to them that they are rightfully due when you wish to marry them - if so, where is it in the book according to you?
why use "weak/powerless children" and not "yatama" if it does indeed mean "vulnerables"? why does it differentiate?
then why does it switch back to "vulnerables" at the end of the verse?

Have you actually put your translation into the occurrences to see if it fits? Please give us your interpretation of 46 for example.

Also, you never answered my question about the alleged confusion about 43.

kgwithnob

...And Noah lived for 950 years, as stated in the quran...

Salaam Dear ramzi,

According to 2914 Noah lived for 1000 yeare, not 950. He was 950 years old when the flood came, then he lived 50 years after the flood.

Peace,
Khalil

IMHO

peace IMHO,

By quoting 4127 I was highlighting the following

it implies there is some sort of stipulation in the book regarding vulnerable women and giving something to them that they are rightfully due when you wish to marry them - if so, where is it in the book according to you?
why use "weak/powerless children" and not "yatama" if it does indeed mean "vulnerables"? why does it differentiate?
then why does it switch back to "vulnerables" at the end of the verse?

Have you actually put your translation into the occurrences to see if it fits? Please give us your interpretation of 46 for example.

Also, you never answered my question about the alleged confusion about 43.

Salaam
As usaul you are trying to understand Quran from English language and using word from English dictionary to get to the bottom of arabic ?musthaefeen? which has much wider meaning from what I can gather, even though my Arabic is not very good. If I take your translation of week/ powerless childern there too I do not see that it refere to only those childern who have no parents or are dependent and vurnable but its those who are week either mentally or have physical disablities. You may forget those childern but God does not leave out any of His creation.

Secondly 43 freemindes regard this as only applying to marrying mother of orphans ?If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice? ?. Which I think is trying to bend the meaning to suit your idea of polygamy,

I think Adnan Rifa emphasis on numeric value of letters should be explored as that is how Hebrew and Arabic was understood in the past so why not look for that. I do not have time on hand to do the numeric value of yatama/yatim at the moment as I will need to get numeric value first but that may give us a better understanding of this word rather than use of English dictionary.

But knowing Wakas I wonder if you would budge from your stand point. Simpls

ramzi

Salaam Dear ramzi,

According to 2914 Noah lived for 1000 yeare, not 950. He was 950 years old when the flood came, then he lived 50 years after the flood.

Peace,
Khalil

Salaam,

A more accurate statement would be, Noah lived among his people for 950 years. Chapter 71 - Noah - talks about Noah during his period with his people (i.e. the 950 years). The chapter is the criterion for determining what constitutes a letter in the quran for three reasons

Noah's time among his people was mentioned in 2914
From the first letter to the last letter of Chapter 71, the content of the Chapter talks about the prophet the chapter is named after.
Noah's miracle was his age

Inshallah when I have more time I will translate and post some examples of the letter value miracle.... of which there are thousands in his book.
www.thekr.net

Regards

Wakas

peace IMHO,

To recap

it implies there is some sort of stipulation in the book regarding vulnerable women and giving something to them that they are rightfully due when you wish to marry them - if so, where is it in the book according to you?

Unanswered.

why use "weak/powerless children" and not "yatama" if it does indeed mean "vulnerables"? why does it differentiate?

It seems like you did not understand my point thus your reply did not answer what I asked. Unanswered.

then why does it switch back to "vulnerables" at the end of the verse?

Unanswered.

Have you actually put your translation into the occurrences to see if it fits? Please give us your interpretation of 46 for example.

Unanswered.

Also, you never answered my question about the alleged confusion about 43.

You never addressed what the confusion or problem is. Unanswered.

I think Adnan Rifa emphasis on numeric value of letters should be explored as that is how Hebrew and Arabic was understood in the past so why not look for that. I do not have time on hand to do the numeric value of yatama/yatim at the moment as I will need to get numeric value first but that may give us a better understanding of this word rather than use of English dictionary.

Good luck with that! By the way, your use of "English dictionary" is incorrect. No-one here uses an English dictionary. Perhaps you mean the Classical Arabic-English lexicon, that is Lane's Lexicon.

But knowing Wakas I wonder if you would budge from your stand point.

Really? Just like how I have not changed my views since I was a Traditional Muslim? Baseless ad-hominen.

To be blunt IMHO, you had your chance to discuss it. You failed.

Each to their own.

IMHO

peace IMHO,

By the way, your use of "English dictionary" is incorrect. No-one here uses an English dictionary. Perhaps you mean the Classical Arabic-English lexicon, that is Lane's Lexicon.

Salaam

Thank you for correcting me that is what I meant.

To be blunt IMHO, you had your chance to discuss it. You failed.

Each to their own

Missed opportunity (

I am a failer Simpls