Chapter 2 (verses 51-100)

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.

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Grourself,

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

CRYSTAL CLEAR!!! Very good post! Regarding etymology, I am in agreement.

(1424) Do you not see how The God gave a similitude/example (of) a good word,as a good tree, its root (is) affirmed/established (fixed) and its branch/top (is) in the sky?

(1426) And (the) similitude/example (of) a bad/spoiled word (is) as a bad/spoiled tree, (it) was uprooted from above the ground , no bottom (root is) for it.

Grourself

Peace mz357

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?

That is a good question and I am looking into that as you are obviously doing too. Compound words are not unique and are one possibility. You know how God asks the questions, ?Will you not use your sense? Or Will you not think?? I try to keep this in mind when I read something like a human becoming an ape or swine. My sense has no problem rejecting that and looking for a rational interpretation. I think if we use our sense we will find the answers. God is aware of the sense He gave us, He also said seek proof of things. So a response like, God can do anything, or God says so, that?s why, smacks of religion. He says He made immutable laws and that is how He pleases. Nothing in the Qur'aan indicates that His creation or His judgment operates arbitrarily.

The nonsense we have to siff through proves Common sense is not so common after all!

shuaib

dear grourself,

thanks for your reply. I agree with a lot of what you say, but again i would say that you have to be very careful before making dramatic conclusions (which goes without saying).

I agree that it is important to know about entymology, and that the Quran is the best of tafsirs etc... but Arabic is special. That is why Allah calls the Arabic language mubeen in the Quran.

You're right that languages change with time, and that was the biggest threat (in my mind) for the Quranic preservation. If the text stayed the same, but the language itself changed in meaning, then that would distort the message of the Quran. But this is exactly where the strength of Arabic comes in.

Most languages change because of changings in the exact meanings of words and the usage of words.

ROOT MEANINGS
At some point, it has to be concluded (through observation), that Arabic was very carefully constructed. This is not a matter of belief or faith but the more closely you look at this amazing langauge, it becomes obvious.

Now all various words of a particular shared root should share meaning in some way. When you gather all the words from a particular root and study their different meanings together, the true meaning of each word is reinforced. That is why, for example, when we look at the word rahmaan, now commonly translated as merciful... if we go back to the root, we find that it has absolutely nothing to do with mercy... we know this because all the other words derived from the root have nothing to do with mercy, and the basic word means mother's womb (i.e. nourishment).

I'm sure so far we are on the same page... but here's what I want to get across...

Arabic is very much a constructed algebraic type language. For example, the verb to do, fa'a'la. If you ad an alif after fa, it becomes faa'il, doer. And actually, if you add an alif after many other root words, it becomes a "doer." Such as kataba to write, kaatib writer. This goes for pretty much every root word in Arabic. So you can imagine how silly someone would seem if they came and said well Kaat and ib are 2 separate root words.

This is the first aspect of the grammar of words. And the more you look into the language, you will see this pattern repeated... formulas are used throughout arabic to derive words from roots.

The funny thing is, you dont even need to spend a lot of time on it. Even a basic study of Arabic will lead you to these conclusions, because its just so darn obvious. Araby is mubeen!

In the same way, we derive the word Qur'aan from qara'a to read. And kaslaan (lazy adjective) from kasala to be lazy. Another word that is constructed according to the same pattern is ramadaan. It's root describes very hot weather, probably representing that the month was named in a year when it occurred in the summer.

SO, what i am trying to say is that in Arabic, entymology is exactly the grammar of word construction also called sarf. But of course, grammar extends beyond that and also includes how words are used in conjunction.

This is also helpful because it creates order. Obviously, if anyone were to manipulate the Arabic language in whatever way they wanted and everyone was coming up with their own separate interpretations, there would be chaos. That is why there is order built RIGHT into the language. It is the most ordered and most well constructed language in existence.

Well this was long-winded but basically I am saying

Entymology is important
Arabic entymology is unique, due to the nature of roots
Entymology is a part of grammar
Grammar is organized and works literally like algebra (in Arabic) and just like algebra, it should be obvious to various indendent observers.

ws.
ps - out of curiosity you mentioned

"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."

I'm curious as to how you are planning on doing entymology without any other source than the Quran. You mention that the roots never change, are you yourself deriving all these roots based on the usages of the word Quran... or is this just some glib word-play without meaning? How are you ACTUALLY in reality using roots?

Grourself

Peace Shuaib,

I'm curious as to how you are planning on doing entymology without any other source than the Quran. You mention that the roots never change, are you yourself deriving all these roots based on the usages of the word Quran... or is this just some glib word-play without meaning? How are you ACTUALLY in reality using roots?

Me? I?m not deriving anything. I?m a novice. My statements were meant to represent that in the absence of qualified research I?d do the next best thing. I?m searching for something or some source of reliable reference (preferably non-religious) that has the same focus, roots. Then, I?d want to compare the usage of the words in the Qur'aan and perhaps make sense of the NONSENSE. It?s a colossal waste of time and energy trying to ponder over a verse only to later discover that it doesn?t even say ?that?. That?s why all the rationalizing and conjecturing trying to explain to those with common sense what the Book says. The best English dictionaries contain a detailed etymology. The dilemma we face is that we are left with an independent author?s choice of the appropriate English words to define the roots.

Once the appropriate English words are chosen to represent each verb, then these words or word must be used consistently throughout the translation allowing only shades of the same meaning to be used. I do not want the translator to decide for me that this is actually what is meant. He needs only to write what it actually says. God teaches it. He does not need to try to form grammatically correct English sentences or beautify it like poetry. The traditional English translations it seems were done by anyone but someone born to the languages, both Arabic & English. I have a good friend who I am convinced is not trying to slant his translation but when he chooses a word in English and I look in a dictionary, his usage is correct but it?s not the word someone who speaks English would probably chose to say the same thing. It sometimes causes me to misunderstand his intent until I look in the dictionary. It?s sort of like the difference between written and spoken Arabic.

Arabic is special, the sheer number of these algebraic formulas make it the best language known to man to clearly express oneself. In English we can be left to guess what the author means but these formulas correctly used leave no room for doubt. You say easy, I agree, it?s not rocket science but the volumes of rules can put off the casual or beginner level student. I?ve received my English education in what I suppose could be called one the best universities this country has to offer and one thing they drummed into my head was difference between good writing and good communicating. The translation of the Qur'aan needs to communicate without the influence of the translator. I spoke to a retired professor from Al Ahzar University in Egypt who says there are un-translated archived writings that for instance prove that the salaah of the messenger was not a ritual, true?, maybe. In this age of information and technology I think a translation could be done with a think tank or committee of the brightest and the best with a common goal, the truth; those best in Arabic and the art of English communication. God has promised to support with His forces those who attain to conviction and with this in mind, united, we may clean the translations.

shuaib

dear grourself,

well i'm not so sure that a translation could be done bro. The problem is that Arabic is very precise and specific. Well, you could have like an exposition or explanation of each verse, but obviously not a word for word translation. That also is a great place to start, but obviously not a replacement for the Arabic because the new insights and developments will have to be done through the Arabic. (And indeed the interpretation of the Quran should advance with human knowledge).

As far as the Arabic language being intimidating... well i agree, you can't expect to just casually learn a language especially as different as Arabic. And there also is a lack of good English written books on Arabic grammar. But I seriously think if every Muslim took out 1 month or 2 sometime in their life to study the language then they could progress quickly... I mean come on, for all other serious pursuits we dedicate our much more time.

But because Arabic is very constructed, it is also easier to learn. For example, in French it is a massive headache conjugating verbs. There are numerous tenses and variations. In Arabic, there is past present and command form, and future is made by merely adding seen to the front of the present form. It's really a one day lesson!

Anyway, as far as the ritualistic aspect of Islam goes... I have just a couple words of advice. Some of these acts may now seem futile... but when they were actually parts of a working machine, they were useful. Doing military exercises as part of an army makes a lot of sense, but then when the army is disbanded and people just live their separate lives, those same exercises seem silly or futile. As far as salah, it actually can be proven in the Quran that this was indeed a physical act.

Fasting, prayer, hajj, all of these "ritualistic" items do have some wisdom in them... and are meant to strengthen and unify the ummah... of course the way they are practiced now often leads to the opposite, unfortunately.

ws

khalil

peace Khalil,

You may wish to cross-reference the root within al quran

Qaf-Ta-Lam

http//www.openburhan.com/pages/ob4faa.html

Wakas

Peace Wakas

I am extremely new to Arabic, extremely new is an understatement however. Today is my first attempt, based on your page at http//homepage.ntlworld.com/think786/PRLr1.zip

Wa-ith qala moosaliqawmihi ya qawmi innakum thalamtumanfusakum biittikhathikumu alAAijla fatooboo ilabari-ikum faoqtuloo anfusakum thalikumkhayrun lakum AAinda bari-ikum fataba AAalaykuminnahu huwa alttawwabu alrraheemu

And remember Moses said to his people "O my people! Ye have indeed wronged yourselves by your worship of the calf So turn (in repentance) to your Maker, and slay yourselves (the wrong-doers); that will be better for you in the sight of your Maker." Then He turned towards you (in forgiveness) For He is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful.

Here's what I have concluded based on the following.

Q-T-L

Wa = And
-itha qala= remeber
moosa=moses
liqawmihi=said
ya=to
qawmi innakum=his people
thalamtumanfusakum=you (plural male) ......
....
al=the
AAijla=cafe

This is what I was able to understand/sabotage(?). I could not find the word with QTL in that order as it said in your root list (Qwiar.htm).

I am going to take up your suggestion on purchasing a arabic/english transliteration (pronounciation) Quran and learn basic terms and begin from there. I have a question though, is this reccomended for begginers?

http//www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0963206788/ref=pd_bxgy_img_2/104-8951258-3426304?v=glance&s=books

pz

khalil

Peace be upon you Khalil,

Regarding the verse where "musa" told his people to kill thierselves, I do not translate "nafs" as SELF. I beleive that "nafs" is "MIND", so he told them to KILL thier MINDS they had, meaning to get rid of thier rejecting thoughts.

The God tells us that He does not change the condition of a people until they change what is in thier MINDS(nafs).

I hope that helps.

Peace be upon you Idolfree1

Your understanding sounds more consistent, because in verse 55 the disbelievers tell Moses "We will never believe in you until we see God manifestly." It appears to me if Moses were to order them to kill theirselves then verse 55 would be incosistent. But, if he ordered them to change their minds (as you put forth) then verse 55 makes sense (to me), since it is talking about changing a belief-what one holds in their mind.

I like your take on 853 and 1311. I have a question, is Nafs root Qaf-Ta-Lam? If so what are all the possible meanings?

pz

Wakas

peace khalil,

Please take your time in understanding Arabic. I myself, am a novice but I'm improving all the time.

I strongly suggest you re-read the subsections in PRL, titled 'What is a root?' and 'Which root is being used?', and go through each step carefully when trying to identify a root.

You asked if the root (i.e. component letters) of 'nafs' is Qaf-Ta-Lam. Simply say the word 'nafs' out loud. Does it sound like it has the letters/sounds of Qaf, Ta or Lam? No. Its main sounds are Na-F-S, this implies the root contains the Arabic letters Nun-Fa-Siin OR Sawd. This is my guess. I checked my sources, and the root is Nun-Fa-Siin. Simple. This is not listed in PRL release 1, as its incomplete. I will include it in release 2, GW.

Onto your question of finding the word with root QTL in the following

Wa-ith qala moosaliqawmihi ya qawmi innakum thalamtumanfusakum biittikhathikumu alAAijla fatooboo ilabari-ikum faoqtuloo anfusakum thalikumkhayrun lakum AAinda bari-ikum fataba AAalaykuminnahu huwa alttawwabu alrraheemu

Why did you only translate part of the sign/verse? You only did upto the part in bold above. If you went a little further, you would have seen the relevant word with the correct root QTL (it is highlighted in blue). Please re-read 'Which root is being used?'. Btw, you should click on the file titled 'list_roots' to start. The root QTL is not in release 1, but I will include it in release 2, GW.

Wakas

Wakas

The info

From Lane and Quran Dictionary (this is the book you linked to at amazon.com, I would recommend it)

Nun-Fa-Siin (root of 'nafs')

occurrences

http//www.irreduciblefifth.force9.co.uk/burhan/b.x.405.htm

possible meanings

was or became high in estimation, of high account or excellent, highly prized/precious/valuable and therefore desired with much emulation or much request, desired, it became loved or highly esteemed, console, cheer, envy.
Was or became avaricious/tenacious/niggardly of it because of its being in high estimation or excellent, little to much good.
Brought forth (e.g. gave birth to a child), menstruated, blood.
Clear away grief/anxiety/sorrow, ease/relieve, delay.
Breath, gust, drew breath, sigh, spoke long (due to regular intake of breath), become extended/long/increased, ability.
Soul/spirit, the vital principle, intellect/reason/mind, inner desire or feeling, knowledge, pride, self-magnification, a state where there is ample scope for action, 'willingly' when used as adverb, nafs - soul of discrimination (mental) and ruh - soul of breath (physical), oneself/itself, whole, essential constituent, reality, sometimes ghayb and nafs are synonymous, a person/being/individual, quantity, man, life, soul + body, life-blood, body, contention/thought/face/substance, heart, stomach, gulp, drought.
Brother or co-partner in faith/religion/relationship.
Wide space, distance, width.
Greatness, nobility, glory, scarcity, absoluteness, unseen, hidden reality which is beyond human perception, intention, requital, punishment.

Qaf-Ta-Lam (root of qatala)

occurrences

http//www.irreduciblefifth.force9.co.uk/burhan/b.x.273.htm

possible meanings

to kill, put to death, be accused, slay/murder/kill/slaughter, attempt to kill, render person like to one killed, to wage war/combat/battle, contend/fight, deadly, knew a thing thoroughly/well, become acquainted with it.

Wakas