Chapter 2 (verses 51-100)

shuaib

Dear brother mz,

believe me, grourself is not onto something...

dear grourself,

the other members here have clarified to you what i thought should have been obvious... so let me add a few more critiques if you weren't embarassed enough by your simple spelling mistake.

A very common wazan used in Arabic is of the form fe'laan, fi'laan, or fu'laan... such as FURQan, QURan, RIDWan, KASLan,TA'Ban, ... all of these words are formed by adding "an" to the root, and it is NOT part of the root. So deconstructing ramadan in the way you have (which has never been done before) seems rather out of place, especially since you totally ignore the MOST common way of deconstructing it. One can only assume its due to total ignorance of Arabic grammar, especially since you cant spell correctly!

Not only did you make one spelling mistake but you made 2... i am not fancy enough to be able to post in arabic so i will post in transliteration.

DTHANN (thought) is not only spelled differently from ramaDaan by the first letter (dwaad)... but it also has 2 noons in the root. Ramadaan only has one noon in the root. To conclude that daan in ramadaan is from thann is actually committing 2 spelling mistakes at once!!

Now there are all sorts of mistakes to be made in this world, but you dont want to be on the losing team because of a silly spelling mistake.

So anyway, if it's not painfully obvious yet to you, I dont know what else to say. But clearly, you did not derive this by yourself. So please, grace all of us on this forum and please br mz why dont you chime in as well... where is this strange teaching coming from?

ws

Grourself

Dear brother mz,

believe me, grourself is not onto something...

dear grourself,

the other members here have clarified to you what i thought should have been obvious... so let me add a few more critiques if you weren't embarassed enough by your simple spelling mistake.

A very common wazan used in Arabic is of the form fe'laan, fi'laan, or fu'laan... such as FURQan, QURan, RIDWan, KASLan,TA'Ban, ... all of these words are formed by adding "an" to the root, and it is NOT part of the root. So deconstructing ramadan in the way you have (which has never been done before) seems rather out of place, especially since you totally ignore the MOST common way of deconstructing it. One can only assume its due to total ignorance of Arabic grammar, especially since you cant spell correctly!

Not only did you make one spelling mistake but you made 2... i am not fancy enough to be able to post in arabic so i will post in transliteration.

DTHANN (thought) is not only spelled differently from ramaDaan by the first letter (dwaad)... but it also has 2 noons in the root. Ramadaan only has one noon in the root. To conclude that daan in ramadaan is from thann is actually committing 2 spelling mistakes at once!!

Now there are all sorts of mistakes to be made in this world, but you dont want to be on the losing team because of a silly spelling mistake.

So anyway, if it's not painfully obvious yet to you, I dont know what else to say. But clearly, you did not derive this by yourself. So please, grace all of us on this forum and please br mz why dont you chime in as well... where is this strange teaching coming from?

ws

Blah, blah, blah...that is what is taught in "grammar" school to children. I am versed in what you have presented. Sadly your presentation smacks of a closed mind. If I accepted your proof at face value without investigation I would be as you are and a blind follower of pagan arabs. I am not overly interested in what the majority understands or the books the arabs have written on grammar or their dictionaries which include things like "salaat" ritual prayer or zakat "poor-rate". God says He explains and teaches the Book, not them. This word ramadhan is unique if understood "as is". My intellect is not yours. Mines tells me that the backwards calendar or month named by them and used by the arabs is not what God is referring to in the Book. I will continue to search for the correct meaning. My post concerning this word was meant as food for thought and never presented as the "last word". I believe I said, "Try this on for size". It's amazing that you "know it all". Where is your translation of the Qur'an? Perhaps we should all be quiet and just sit back and listen and allow you to "teach" the Qur'an. God has made laws for guidance. His laws never change and He has promised to guide those who seek guidance and His promise never fails. I shall trust in Him. (not arab grammar books).

If you follow the majority on earth they will lead you astray.

Grourself

BTW

I will forward the rational portion of your disagreements to the author.

sabo

Salam,

Salaams sabo,
I think Grourself is onto something understandable

I beg you to learn arabic before telling me what you think , thanks.

I will forward the rational portion of your disagreements to the author.

Yeah and please try to forward to him that we beg him to learn arabic before analysing its words )

thanks.

Best regards,
sabo

shuaib

Dear Grourself,

Why is it that after 2 straightforward requests, you are too shy/embarassed/?? to tell us WHO this author is?

Here's the thing grourself, if you had presented your argument in a rational fashion which means no spelling mistakes, acknowledging and explaining why the conventional grammar is wrong... i might have still said i disagree with you, but i would also say heck this guy knows his stuff.

But to be SO pro for a particular argument that despite 2 ridiculous spelling mistakes, and ignoring all the BASIC rules of grammar that are not derived merely by ARABS but are derived from the Arabic used THROUGHOUT the Quran... aren't you being the one that's closed minded?

Frankly, if I was in your position (and I have been in your position), i would be very embarassed. But just like any closed minded person, you are just that much more vocal and enraged. But I'm not surprised because many people in this world are closed minded... you must have been open minded at some point, where you accepted this very strange belief... but now you seem to have closed out any possibility of you being wrong.

But then again, its not you who is wrong... its whoever this mysterious author who shall not be named.

I am not an Arab, nor did I grow up learning Arabic. I went through great pains to learn Arabic, and attempt to understand the Quran through itself. Not through the words of others. And truly, if you have no clue about Arabic or Arabic grammar then you are on loose soil. Traditional grammar teachings CAN be wrong, nothing is infallible outside the Quran. BUT, you can't be so cavalier that you mispell, ignore all exisiting grammatical rules, and adopt a teaching that would be SO radical that it would not only change how you understand the word RAMADAN, but also QURAN, FURQAN, KASLAN, IRFAN, TABAAN, IMTIHAAN, etc etc etc...

even the most basic student of Arabic can see that one of the most beautiful parts of Arabic is the simple rule, one root for one word.

if you still think ramadaan refers to something else by all means give us the historical reasoning, and your research. but dont resort to grammatical/linguistic analysis because it just won't work.

wassalam

unknownuser

Salaams sabo ,
i wasn't telling you what i think,i smply stated that as a general remark ,rather i was showing you how, your article was slightly misleading ,as politely as was possible,thanks.

By giving the meaning of Zhan and not Dhan.

And no i don't intend to learn Arabic whether thats an offence to you or not.

And some people here think you have to have a degree in arabic or something to be able to understand ,it.

I personally would say the Arabs ,have made fools of the world ,for a long long time ,And Allah willing it will end gradually.

No disrespects,meant.
Allah hafiz.

shuaib

bro mz357,

"no i don't intend to learn Arabic"

"some people here think you have to have a degree in arabic or something to be able to understand it"

let me ask you, how do you portend to understand Arabic without learning it? Pray tell what is this superhuman characteristic of yours, since most people on this planet need to learn a language in order to understand it.

There is only one advantage for you not to learn arabic... and that is so that you can continue to believe your mysterious masters words who has so mesmerized you, that you would rather take his/their words rather than approach the Quran with an open mind. (The definition of open-mind being to accept ones fallibility especially when confronted with undeniable proofs/disproofs)

ws

Grourself

Peace,

Take a deep breath my brothers! lol

I don?t usually engage in this sort of internet rhetoric because the anonymous relationships somehow breed arrogance and self righteousness in many but I want to be clear on something

?Try this on for size? equals a closed mind ????

I would also like to make a comment on the issue of the author. My omission was deliberate. Intellectual debates do not require the author?s identity when debating on the facts put forward. Not mentioning the author eliminates two very possible and probable reactions

It prevents blind followers from simply jumping on the side of those they allow to lead them.
It precludes certain personality types from expressing perceived or unperceived prejudices before considering the facts.

Some people learn only with concrete learning materials, i.e., grammar rules, and others are able to learn in the abstract and can perceive concepts communicated by looking at the big picture. The human mind is complex and we are not all alike. What is the good of attacking someone or being sarcastic and snide simply because they understand something differently than you? Spelling? read this

Could this be why generation after generation those fluent in Arabic have failed to recognize the insidious corruptions in translations of God?s guidance in Qur'aan Majeed?

Could this be why they have failed to notice these translations and concepts make no sense?

Or are they simply ?sheeple??

The paomnnehil pweor of the hmuan mnid. Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. >The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Perety amzanig huh?

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. I take the truth where I find it. Believe me when I tell you my mind is open to the ?possibilities?. The pagan Arabs have corrupted and perverted the plain, clear, easy teachings in the Qur'aan. That?s why we are here now attempting to ?crack the code? or perhaps it as God intended. Those sincere would have to seek the guidance. The Arabs have not been made keepers of the faith as they would have mankind believe. A dictionary or a grammar book can be WRONG!

I know some need to believe that every dot and tittle in the Qur'aan is as it has always been and nothing has been changed but the concept of God preserving, and protecting the message and guidance in the Book does not necessarily mean that every diacritical mark is as it should be. However, that is ones right to believe such a thing. When one is pragmatic that understanding seems unreasonable and could be construed as blind faith. It seems an indefensible position. I find what I can understand of the Qur'aan to be totally pragmatic. That understanding, ?every dot and tittle?, is exactly what Christians are now using against Islam when they produce different versions of the Qur'aan e.g. Warsh vs. Hafs. Preservation through word of mouth is even less defensible. God says He is the preserver, and guardian of the Book. Does He tell you how He accomplishes this? I?m not sure, are you? Let?s resign ourselves to just debating the facts, pros and cons, and allow for all open and free minds to express themselves. Let?s question, reason and think! We might learn something. Those convinced do not fall down deaf and blind even at the words we read in the Qur'aan. I hope these words reflect my sincerity and I offer the verses below to defend this position.

2573 ? And who, whenever they are reminded of even the Revelations of their Lord, do not fall at them deaf and blind (with deaf and blind acceptance).

218 Deaf, dumb and blind of Reason. They won?t return to begin their journey in the right direction until they use their faculties of perception and reasoning (822, 1676,1736).

2171 The attitude of blind following drags people to subhuman level (7179). Like a herd of sheep they understand nothing but only hear calls that are meaningless to them. They just inherit the senseless actions of their ancestors. Deaf, dumb, blind because they choose not to use their faculties. Such people, of course, fail to attain sense.

822 The worst of creations in the Sight of Allah are those deaf, those dumb who do not use their intellect (218, 1676).

Wakas

peace All,

In all movements, you will get the extreme swings to either side. Some people try to reject every single thing that might be traditional, some people accept every traditional teaching. Just be the WaSaT.

Wakas

shuaib

dear grourself,

well i understand why you might be unwilling to give the name of this author person, but i dont think you should worry about that on this forum. anyway, this is something totally new which i have never heard before, so that is why i was curious. does anyone else know where these teachings come from?

anyway, there is no problem with having an open mind. and i do appreciate what you and bro mz are trying to do. you realize that the current system for the past 1000 years hasn't worked, and current traditions often are senseless, and you were in search of a better explanation. at some point you came across a teaching that you really agreed with, and you are running with that.

but some words of caution... please still be objective. you need proofs for your beliefs... you cannot just say that you somehow have a unique perception of or grasp of "the bigger picture," because any charlatan can say that and anyone can fool themself too.. proofs however, avoid this possible problem.

So again, if you wholeheartedly believe something that is based on things which have no proof or REASON whatsoever... why are you surprised that I call it closed-mindedness? you state that you DO believe something that is based on spelling mistakes... how can anyone say that you are walking with both eyes open?

Is there any more simple way to say it? Your belief is based on spelling mistakes... and also ignoring grammar of any kind. remember, you have not provided alternate grammar, you've just totally ignored any idea of the concept of grammar... otherwise you would already have worked out how your rule should apply to other words like QURAN, FURQAN, IMRAN, etc etc

ws

Grourself

Peace,

Shuaib

So again, if you wholeheartedly believe something that is based on things which have no proof or REASON whatsoever... why are you surprised that I call it closed-mindedness? you state that you DO believe something that is based on spelling mistakes... how can anyone say that you are walking with both eyes open?

My position is that it is you who could possibly believe something that is based on spelling mistakes or wrong grammar.

I think you are missing the point. The Muslim world has never been able to address the challenge to prove that there are no spelling mistakes or changes in the Qur'aan. Why? Because to believe such a thing is based on blind faith. Read ?The Perfect Quran?. I think it?s by someone called Brother Mark. The author provides scanned images to show the discrepancies which are undeniable. His next line of proof relies on traditions which make that portion of his argument moot. Mankind and (shiver) the desert Arabs reliability and credibility to preserve a book from 14 centuries ago is unlikely. God?s promise to preserve and teach the message is infallible. We are told to take the challenge and propagate for God using reason and intellect. God never proposes blind faith. How would one prove to Brother Mark that every word in the Qur'aan is as it should be and contains no spelling errors? It is a perfectly reasonable line of questioning from a man who thinks even though in the case of Br. Mark he?s just another blind follower of Christianity. I understand from the narratives in the Qur'aan when on the Day of Deen the companions of the fire will ask for double punishment for those they followed and are told ?double for you both? has a lesson that includes blind following even with good intentions will not be acceptable on that day and that if I make a mistake let it be my own. We will answer individually as to the use of our reason and intellect. It is not so important to all understand everything the same. It is important to purify ourselves from shirk by not blindly following other authorities after God which is shirk. I know you are probably thinking I am preaching to the choir but I am trying to explain my motives. I cannot propagate something that I cannot reasonably explain. (My post did not indicate that it was what I believed or to use words you added like wholeheartedly but it makes more sense than what I?ve seen so far.)Been there, done that (blindly following hadith). Taubah is turning back to the right direction. I?m seeking those reasonable explanations and best answers in the Qur'aan. I thought this was a forum of like minded people. I?m not intimidated by criticism but some are and I want to hear what they have to say. Let?s not drive them away or keep them among the many silent readers by making things up like where you say I said I have some kind of ?unique perception? to see the big picture and that?s what my proof is based on or that I am running with something. It?s counterproductive.

shuaib

dear grourself,

Well i think there are certain principles that we all need to agree on, otherwise there is no point in talking.

Firstly, your clear disdain for "desert arabs" while i understand a little bit what your intention is, realize that our beloved Prophet and the beloved sahaba were "desert Arabs." Realize that some of the greatest scientists and greatest accomplishments of the world were done by "desert Arabs." And the language of the "desert Arabs" was the one chosen by Allah for the WORD OF ALLAH.

The Quran was memorized and compiled into a book at the time of the Prophet and mass production was carried out shortly thereafter. There may be differences in pronunciation (warsh, hafs etc) but the Quranic content is uniform. To believe that the Quran was altered is to believe that Allah has broken his promise. Why? Because once altered, you can never have that same thing back again... it will never again be purely Allah's words. No matter how many cockamaney grammar inventions you come up with, you will never say 100% what Allah SAID.

It is unfortunate that many hadiths abound which discredit the Quran. Hadith saying that there are ayahs that are missing, that the Quran was written on leaves and bones and not compiled into a book until much after the Prophet died. These hadiths truly are fabricated, for the sole purpose of discrediting the Quran.

As far as your brother Mark, i was not able to find anything about this book except a small bit on a christian forum, here's what one person had to say

"By the way the author of that book has a picture of two Quranic texts. One Turkish, the other, Egyptian. I read them both and found no difference. Can you do the same? The Arabic language is not like English, it is much differnent. The letters are right there, in the exact place for 1400 years. He points to a letter that he infact changed! You can see the pixels in an arranged manner. As an arabic reader, I can tell that the author is a fake and a liar"

Grourself, you can't just pretend that the Quran has been changed because you think it's too amazing for it to be preserved! Just read it, and look at the meaning, and THEN if you see a contradiction, or unreasonable thing, THEN you can start saying hmm there's a problem. But what you seem to be doing is ASSUMING the Quran is corrupt... and I dont know any self-respecting Muslim who would dare to do such a thing without a reason.

So far what you have posted about Ramadan has been pretty much meaningless. And now you are proposing that somehow I am the one that is spelling wrong??? Arabic is Arabic... it's not up to you to start creating new grammar and new words on your own... because you are merely trying to write the book with your own hands.

It would be one thing if you proposed something coherent... but your breakdown of the word ramadaan was nothing short of ridiculous. To not even be able to spell, to have no clue about how words are constructed, and to be so defiant in the face of OVERWHELMING evidence to the contrary... at first I said closed minded, but you almost seem bent on saying that Islam itself is corrupt, in which case this discussion is over.

ws

unknownuser

Dear all,
There is a lot of mistranslation ,done on purpose to benefit the pagan arabs and some unintentional misintarpretations - according to the biblical ,or taurat stories and then you people frogot the Grammer of the quran as is visible here on this forum.

And Allah willing we will learn the real message but in due course no doughts about that!

Thanks.

Grourself

Peace,

Firstly, your clear disdain for "desert arabs" while i understand a little bit what your intention is, realize that our beloved Prophet and the beloved sahaba were "desert Arabs." Realize that some of the greatest scientists and greatest accomplishments of the world were done by "desert Arabs." And the language of the "desert Arabs" was the one chosen by Allah for the WORD OF ALLAH.

997 The desert Arabs are more hard in rejection and hypocrisy, and more likely to ignore the Limits that Allah has revealed to His Messenger. Allah is Knower, Wise.
998 Among these Bedouin Arabs is he who looks upon his spending as a penalty, and awaits a disaster to hit you. (They hope for the Divine Order to collapse). It is they who invite disaster upon themselves. Allah is Hearer, Knower.
999 And among the Bedouins are those who believe in Allah and the Last Day and consider their spending as a means towards Allah and a means of supporting the Messenger. This will raise their ranks with Allah. Allah will embrace them with His Mercy. Verily, Allah is Forgiving, Gracious.

You disagree?

Grourself, you can't just pretend that the Quran has been changed because you think it's too amazing for it to be preserved! Just read it, and look at the meaning, and THEN if you see a contradiction, or unreasonable thing, THEN you can start saying hmm there's a problem. But what you seem to be doing is ASSUMING the Quran is corrupt... and I dont know any self-respecting Muslim who would dare to do such a thing without a reason.

What I think is not the point but what I can prove is the point. I said it is a reasonable assumption. You miss the point again and you cannot seem to only read what is written without interjecting your ideas and opinions. What would please me is to be able to offer irrefutable proof that it is as claimed. That would be perfect but so far I don?t see that proof yet available. I can of course point to many amazing truths in the Book but when questioned about the nonsensical meanings applied to some verses then what do I put forth? Do I say like the Christians that you just have to believe? That is blind faith and blind following. I am searching for the irrefutable proof. I would not use myself as a barometer because I have proved that I can be led, I followed hadith. I seek the proof for those less gullible. I do know self respecting Muslims with credentials of intelligentsia that have found good reason to question. According to the corrupt translations available there is good reason to say?humm there is a problem. What is causing that problem? Spelling? Grammar? Lack of intellect? I don?t know. If I use an Arabic to English or any other language dictionary there are verses which make no sense as explained by desert arabs. Without hadith to prop up their explanation one is left without any guidance, as intended by God, at all. Arabic is a word that itself means plain/clear and what you propose is anything but. Do we now credit the Arabs because their language is the language of the Qur'aan? What nonsense again. I believe the Qur'aan is the word of God and He is able to preserve and teach the Book and He doesn?t need us to make up a defense for the Book. God is sufficient as a witness and He brings His proof, always, it?s His law. It is not His whim or randomly applied. You discredit hadith but offer as proof what you say is historically correct. History is full of lies. Is that proof? Something written in another book which God has not promised to preserve. When He says associate NOTHING with Me, I think I understand that to be nothing, no holy buildings, no holy cities, no holy rocks, no holy language, no sneezes and other such garbage. I understand the message in the Book to be guidance for an orderly way of life for God that includes permanent social values. No religion. When the self is primed for success it will be rewarded in the future, the next life, a bargain. When we serve God as Sovereign we reach our potential. When we sacrifice our intellect and serve false authorities including our own desires we drag our ?selves? down. I say it is all from God but I don?t understand it all. Therefore I will ask those who know, the scientist, not the historian or the self appointed religious scholars of arabic.

It would be one thing if you proposed something coherent... but your breakdown of the word ramadaan was nothing short of ridiculous. To not even be able to spell, to have no clue about how words are constructed, and to be so defiant in the face of OVERWHELMING evidence to the contrary... at first I said closed minded, but you almost seem bent on saying that Islam itself is corrupt, in which case this discussion is over.

No more nonsensical then what you propose. You mention Islam, capital "I", a proper noun. It?s a verb, surrender. Surrender for God is not corrupt only what you propose it says in the Book. I see muslims pretend a fast is an uplifting test when a fast is expiation for a self wronged on certain fixed days and no fun at all. I find a yearly simultaneous fast for all mankind nonsensical and ritualistically done. Nothing communal about it and the only other person mentioned in connection to a fast is ones spouse. That is why there is so much spec as to how to fast in the arab month of Ramadan. Because it is not enjoined. Easy! But then that?s my understanding and I don?t need to convince you. I shall answer for what I do as will you.

shuaib

Dear grourself,

I?m going to try to make this as organized as possible.

Part A - Common Ground

Like I said before, we cannot have a discussion without some common ground.

As Muslims, part of our Imaan involves imaan in Allah, the Prophet, and his books including the Quran. In one fell swoop you cast doubt on all these 3 by suggesting the Quran has been corrupted.

482 Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)? Had it been from other Than Allah, they would surely have found therein Much discrepancy.

Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely be its guardian.

To suggest that anything has been added or subtracted from the Quran would cast doubt on the ENTIRE book. One could never claim TRUE imaan in an imperfectly preserved work.

Now you ask for PROOF that it wasn?t changed. But the Quran asks nonbelievers (and some Muslims I guess, as in this case) that if you think it was changed, then there should be discrepancies, i.e. it is a CHALLENGE. It?s not feasible for me to go through every verse to prove its validity, but all you need is ONE counterexample.

So you can?t put the cart before the horse. Unless we agree on our imaan in the Quran, there is no point to talking about other issues.

Part B ? Arabs

Your borderline racist comments about Arabs has probably been the least enlightened thing you?ve said. You quoted some verses about some ?desert Arabs.? Of course there were enemies of the Prophet who were Arabs, where was the Quran revealed?? But also, the prophet and the sahaba were Arabs! Stereotypes are meaningless, and if you want to talk about who has done the most damage to the meaning of Islam, it was really the sophisticated elite Persians. Further discussion on this topic will be totally fruitless.

Part C ? Ramadaan

Let?s face it, this discussion started by the meaning of Ramadaan. You presented something you thought to be interesting and which apparently you still believe, but never once acknowledged any sort of mistake on your part or the author (which is typical of closed-mindedness). So let me ask frankly

How was it that such a remarkably insightful theory was based on a very simple spelling mistake of the word THANN?? Were you THAT much of a blind follower that you couldn?t even look that little word up?
Why is it that you never provided any sort of evidence for the months being named AFTER hijrah? Most of the historical evidence implies the opposite, as well as Quranic evidence.
Why didn?t you explain why there are other words very similar to ramadaan that only break into 1 root (Quran, Furqaan, Imraan, Kaslaan, etc)
Failed to provide a real example of an Arabic word breaking down into 2 roots

I know, you?ve said it before. You don?t have to believe my grammar. But even that statements displays total lack of understanding of what grammar is.

Grammar is an objective linguistic SCIENCE that should be reproducible by separate independent observers of a language. There is nothing to BLINDLY believe. That?s like saying math teachers ask you to BLINDLY follow them, a totally ignorant notion. There?s nothing blind about grammatical science? if you doubt something, disprove it. Disproving something doesn?t mean that you just provide a random unproven explanation, like 1+ 1 = 3, without reasoning. You MUST provide reasons, examples, and then show how that result can be GENERALIZED. This is just like ANY derivation of laws in science.

You ended your post very fittingly, in line with most of your other ideas.

?No more nonsensical then what you propose. You mention Islam, capital "I", a proper noun. It?s a verb??

Here?s a tip for you? don?t embarrass yourself further by making claims without knowledge. Learn some basic Arabic. Islam is a NOUN. Sallama is the verb.

ws

Grourself

Peace Shuaib,

Like I said before, we cannot have a discussion without some common ground.

As Muslims, part of our Imaan involves imaan in Allah, the Prophet, and his books including the Quran. In one fell swoop you cast doubt on all these 3 by suggesting the Quran has been corrupted.

Imaan=conviction

I do not suggest the Qur'aan has been corrupted. I suggest the meanings have been corrupted by pagans, rejecters, lexicologists, the changing rules of what is grammatically correct and even perhaps the so-called infallible diacritical points.

How does one attain conviction? I propose, as per the Qur'aan, it is attained through the use of reason and intellect. The common ground you propose is based on blind faith. No where do I find blind faith enjoined in the Qur'aan and contrarily

218 Deaf, dumb and blind of Reason. They won?t return to begin their journey in the right direction until they use their faculties of perception and reasoning (822, 1676,1736).

1736 And you shall not follow blindly any information of which you have no direct knowledge. (Using your faculties of perception and conception) you must verify it for yourself. In the Court of your Lord, you will be held accountable for your hearing, sight, and the faculty of reasoning.

2573 ? And who, whenever they are reminded of even the Revelations of their Lord, do not fall at them deaf and blind (with deaf and blind acceptance).

2943 And so We cite examples for mankind, but men of Science will make best use of their intellect. (?Aalim = Scientist. 3022-23, 3527-2

The verse you quote is a perfect starting point and example. If we approach the Qur'aan objectively the traditional renditions present many discrepancies or contradictions.

482 Will they not then, try to understand this Quran? If it were from other than Allah they would surely have found in it much contradiction.

4113 But for the Grace of Allah upon you (O Prophet), a party among them were bent upon diverting you, but they only misled themselves. They cannot hurt you at all. He has given to you the Law and the Logic behind it. He teaches you that you knew not. Contrary to blind faith, the use of Reason empowers you with Conviction (1210. The Grace of Allah upon you is Infinite.

637 They say, ?If only a miracle could come down to him from his Lord!? Say, ?Allah surely has the Power to send down a miracle, but most of them do not use their knowledge.? (He does not wish to stun the human intellect with supernatural phenomena. He wants people to reflect and use reason 1210.

264 Had We so Willed, We could have sent down to them a Sign from the sky, to which they would have bent their necks in humility. (But, that is not Our Design. We expect them to use their reason 1210).

I have chosen to use the renditions by Dr. Shabbir Ahmed, a brilliant yet humble student of the Qur'aan. They are not literal but are his understanding and eliminate the need for additional explanations for my purpose here.

To suggest that anything has been added or subtracted from the Quran would cast doubt on the ENTIRE book. One could never claim TRUE imaan in an imperfectly preserved work.

Now you ask for PROOF that it wasn?t changed. But the Quran asks nonbelievers (and some Muslims I guess, as in this case) that if you think it was changed, then there should be discrepancies, i.e. it is a CHALLENGE. It?s not feasible for me to go through every verse to prove its validity, but all you need is ONE counterexample.

We must take the challenge and it goes both ways. Can one reasonably explain humans turned into apes and swine? A man hibernating for 100 years? A staff becomes a snake??These renditions defy reason. If a grammar book or a dictionary teaches that the words used are locked to THESE meanings then there ARE many contradictions. However, men of reason and intellect will not be swayed by these sources. They ponder on the signs and proofs in the Qur'aan that teach us some things of the nature of God and His control and power and His immutable laws, become convinced and take action upon this conviction. They will search for the truth of the claims and challenges in the Book and ponder on them in the same manner. I cannot propose to one unfamiliar with the Qur'aan that it is the infallible word of God and not bring proof. If one approaches the Book with a pure heart seeking guidance he does not leave behind his intellect and discernment. The claims and challenges in the Book must be investigated and the proofs of these claims must hold up to all scrutiny.

2.2 That Book is without doubt - in it - a guide - for those who are observant.
2.3 Those who are CONVINCED with the unseen and they uphold the commitments - and from what We provided to them - they contributed
2.4 And they are CONVINCED with what is transmitted to you and what was transmitted from before you, and with the hereafter - they are POSITIVELY CERTAIN.
2.5 They are - on the guidance from their Lord - and they are - themselves the benefactors.

These verses do not imply that you attain this conviction because you simply ?believe?. The Book continues and teaches us how to attain conviction. How does one become POSITIVELY CERTAIN of the hereafter? I put forward that is it by the use of reason and intellect and pondering over the proofs presented in the Book. Not blind faith at all. What has convinced a person that a staff can become a snake? We may rationalize that God can do all things and we have yet to understand the science behind this phenomena but that frame of mind is contrary to what He has taught us when He says His laws are immutable, He does not use the stunning of the intellect as proof. Science has not gone backwards. It?s not reasonably sound. Nor is it reasonably sound to think that as GUIDANCE God has used words, that according to some translators, man can never know or understand their meaning.

If a Book is called timeless then the original audience who became mo?min must have understood the base meaning. How else could they have attained conviction? The progress of science does not negate their understanding, it enhances upon it. The traditional renditions and lexicologists would have us believe fairy tales. I believe, note the use of the word believe, that the entire, the whole, the complete, Book is meant to be understood and acted upon. As to conviction, it is to be attained, forward motion, as indicted by the form of the verb. In this case I find no fault in the FALLIBLE grammar book as this rule appeals to my intellect. I am not obligated to blindly accept any man made rules; they have been known to change or to be wrong. To simply read the Qur'aan and accept it at face value is not what is purported in the Qur'aan itself.

I totally reject what has been handed down to us as THE TRUTH from previous generations as ?the meaning of the Glorious Qur'aan?. I?ll search for the meaning myself with those of like minds (or better minds lol ). It?s a huge undertaking but that?s how you eat an elephant, one bite at a time.

I ?believe? there is a system of checks and balances (tasreef) built into the Book that eliminate the need to guess which meaning from outside sources, such as dictionaries and grammar books and possibly diacritical points, is correct. I am seeking conviction and certainty for what I ?believe?. This is the ground I stand on. God is aware of my intentions.

Now I will address the rest of your diatribe but only briefly cuz you obviously refuse to play nice

Borderline Racist? You don?t know from racism my brother if you could say something so sappy. The Arabs are in a league of their own when it comes to racism. To be a racist one needs power. A simple comment is not worth mentioning in the context of racism. Don?t believe the hype.
Do you think that God was not aware of ?ajami?? Did He say they were the worse or are the worse among the desert arabs? We are talking Arabs and I included the verse in context which you failed to grasp.

You have no idea unless I tell you as to what I believe. When you ass-u-me you make an ass out of you and me.

You cannot seem to understand, I was not talking parts of speech with noun/verb etc. It is meant to show that you chose to make a proper noun where none is indicated. Are there now caps in Arabic? You also obviously do not know that what was once mathematically sound has now since changed as do most man-made conclusions and theories which renders your reference moot. Your history is lies agreed upon or his-story. Grammar as a science is another one of your jokes, just like the science of hadith. Cuz you or the proverbial they call it that don?t make it so. I will allow the author, whom I can assure you knows how to spell, defend his findings on Ramadan. You hang in there with your jibberish translations and grammar books and I?ll continue to search for what makes sense. BTW, don?t bother trying to teach me how to spell ?because.? Nah Nah Na Nah Na.
Now that's what I'd call embarrassing behavior! o

grourself, this is me dusting off and putting back on ADULT disguise of one who hates to argue with those who act like children.

unknownuser

Good to listen to you speaking-everything so nicely put.

Like your reasoning.

Salaam.

shuaib

dear grourself,

I'll try to reply in a similar manner to before.

Part A - Quran/Imaan

Ok, well if you at least agree that the text of the Quran has been preserved, then that's at least one more common thing we have.

As far as meanings, well I am in agreement with what you say. Things such as, for example, the staff turning into a snake, does not make sense. I agree with that. But it is the grammar and the lexicons that allow you to look deeper into the text of the Quran! It is the lexicons that will allow you to understand that staff can also mean the proofs or evidences to support ones argument. I dont know if you have investigated this route.

And I agree wholeheartedly with the verses you posted, and the fact that you should't believe the Quran/Quranic tafseers blindly. You must understand as well.

"If a grammar book or a dictionary teaches that the words used are locked to THESE meanings then there ARE many contradictions."

If you really investigate the matter, you will find that it is actually the grammar books and lexicons which allow you to dispel any false meanings attributed to the Quran.

Part B - Arabs

Bro, what I meant to say is that you are merely presenting a stereotype and making conclusions based on that. Anyway, perhaps I should have said it differently but what I meant to say was there's no need to deal in stereotypes especially of large groups of people. The pagan Arabs, the Muslim Arabs, or whoever, everyone has good people and bad people in their fold. The pagan Arabs really didn't do very much to corrupt Islam at all (they just fought the Prophet), it was really the intelligentia esp of Persia.

Part C - Ramadan

Well interestingly, you again ignored whatever questions I asked you on this topic.

I asked YOU some questions (not just your mysterious author), like for example, were you that much of a blind follower that you didn't even bother to look up the word thann? What's even more disturbing is that you don't even seem to care that it was obviously wrong.

Part D - Grammar

"You also obviously do not know that what was once mathematically sound has now since changed as do most man-made conclusions and theories which renders your reference moot. "

On the contrary bro, if you THOUGHT about it, it actually PROVES my point. My entire point was that there is NO blind following in the science of mathematics. IF there was blind following, NOTHING would be disproved or discarded and NOTHING new would be discovered. It is precisely because each law can be questioned and refined that we call it a science.

If you had any idea what grammar was, you would see that the same goes for grammar! RESEARCH, yes research is often done on grammar. I remember meeting an Arab phd student and he was writing a thesis that would radically change the way verbs were viewed and provided new explanations for why certain conjugations were made in particular ways.

Let me say it a different way. Science of grammar means that when various INDEPENDENT observers examine a language and derive its grammar, they should arrive at the same rules/laws. When various independent observers examine GRAVITY, they should arrive at the same rules/laws. When various independent observers examine VERBS, they should arrive at the same rules/laws governing conjugation.

There is NO dogma, NO blind following, NO trusting, and nothing is etched in stone. Now that said, obviously grammar is not as precise a science as physics because of the nature of what you are dealing with. BUT, the same conditions apply... if someone derives a grammatical rule, it should WORK when applied generally... if you want to disprove that rule, just provide a counterexample or alternative theory and that grammatical rule should be thrown out, if your theory is better!

As far as hadith science goes, you and I both know the story is different. It is based on dogma. The science only goes so far as to examine the personality of the supposed narrators, which obviously is subjective (based on someone's opinions) and difficult to prove or disprove. Especially since it does not critique the CONTENT of the hadith, it has some serious issues. There is NOTHING similar between grammar and hadith science.

So bottom line is

Grammar is a science
You do NOT have to believe anyone, there is no dogma
If you have a BETTER theory or law, then present it and apply it GENERALLY (not just to one case of your choice)

"Are there now caps in Arabic?"

Ok bro, English is English and Arabic is Arabic. There aren't caps in Arabic, true, but there also aren't commas, or other things commonly used in English. When using a proper noun in English, you use caps. Duh. Should we also not capitalize our first and last names, since they are Arabic? And how will we capitalize our English friends names when writing their name in Arabic?

"I was not talking parts of speech with noun/verb etc." (1 post ago)

You sure about that???

"You mention Islam, capital "I", a proper noun. It?s a verb?? (2 post ago)

From your last post I think we have more in common than I previously believed. But I still think you are taking dangerous steps without looking carefully.

ws

unknownuser

Dear Grourself,

You said

I ?believe? there is a system of checks and balances (tasreef) built into the Book that eliminate the need to guess which meaning from outside sources, such as dictionaries and grammar books and possibly diacritical points, is correct. I am seeking conviction and certainty for what I ?believe?. This is the ground I stand on. God is aware of my intentions.

Does this method work if the word only accurs once or maybe twice throughout the quran ,mistranslated, or should one seek the aid of the dictionary with respect to the context of the ayat in quision and the surounding ayats?

Salaams.

Grourself

Peace Shuaib,

And I agree wholeheartedly with the verses you posted, and the fact that you should't believe the Quran/Quranic tafseers blindly. You must understand as well.

The only tafseer that I am interested in is the Qur'aan itself. The best of tafseers! I?ve found other tafseers to be mainly conjecture, mullahism, and fairytale hadith references. Fairytale is too mild of a word because they are indeed criminal. I choose to discard them and try to approach the Qur'aan with a clear head. Many simple statements were difficult to understand until I realized I had preconceived ideas of what the verses were saying.

Bro, what I meant to say is that you are merely presenting a stereotype and making conclusions based on that. Anyway, perhaps I should have said it differently but what I meant to say was there's no need to deal in stereotypes especially of large groups of people. The pagan Arabs, the Muslim Arabs, or whoever, everyone has good people and bad people in their fold. The pagan Arabs really didn't do very much to corrupt Islam at all (they just fought the Prophet), it was really the intelligentia esp of Persia.

Avoiding stereotypes is why I posted the verse before and after. God never stereotypes or globally condemns a people. However, He points to people among the Arabs as the worse. I also understand the verses below if correctly translated to be referring to these same people.

481 They claimed obedience, but as soon as they go away, they decided among themselves to conspire with what was NOT said to them. And God is recording what they have decided. Therefore, turn away from them, and trust in your God, and God suffices as your protector.

9.107 And those who built a masjid (SYSTEM OF SUBMISSION) to cause harm and for unbelief and to cause disunion among the believers and an ambush to him who made war against Allah and His Apostle before; and they will certainly swear We did not desire aught but good; and Allah bears witness that they are most surely liars.

9.108 Never stand in it; certainly a masjid (SYSTEM OF SUBMISSION) founded on piety from the very first day is more deserving that you should stand in it; in it are men who love that they should be purified; and Allah loves those who purify themselves.

"I was not talking parts of speech with noun/verb etc." (1 post ago)

You sure about that???

"You mention Islam, capital "I", a proper noun. It?s a verb?? (2 post ago)

I don?t know if I can clear up your misunderstanding of my reference to verb. When I re-read my post I can see how you might misunderstand. I simply meant that this is one of the problems, taking Arabic verbs and whatever their derivatives may be, not translating them to English and capitalizing them. For example, I have seen Christians immediately go on the defensive when told, ?The Qur'aan says Jesus was a Muslim?. Actually the Qur'aan says Jesus surrendered for God. There is a totally different tenor to that statement. I hope I?ve made myself clear. BTW, as long as my posts are I do forget to add things such as commending your efforts to fully learn the Arabic language. Many Many Many years ago I applied myself in the same manner to English, much of what I?ve long since forgotten. I?ve seen what was considered bad grammar become appropriate usage and I?ve watch the language change. What I?d really like to focus on rather than dictionaries or grammar at this stage of my journey is etymology. Dictionary meanings change and are constantly added to, which any dictionary worth its salt would have to do, but the root meaning of a word never changes. I think the etymology is one of the keys to preserving the meanings of the words in the Qur'aan and gives a clearer understanding of what the word has come to mean and how it is used. Again, that?s just what I think.

As far as your questions about looking up the word etc goes. I?d prefer to withhold my findings until I speak with the author. I?m sorry you think I would blindly follow this but my reservation is only because I must give him at least the benefit of doubt. I don?t know what he has in his mind or how he reached his conclusions. He is fallible but brilliant as is my dear friend Dr. Shabbir Ahmed. I don?t agree with all his understandings but that doesn?t mean he?s wrong, could be me. Some things I?ve learned the hard way. I like to borrow a holocaust slogan from those (without approval by God) who call themselves guided, the yahud NEVER AGAIN!, when it comes to blind following. To me the blind following is just as serious as the slaughter.