Zulafan min al-laili
-
Salam All..
in 11114
"Zulafan min al-laili" is generally translated by " the approaches of the night"
Im no arabic speaker, but somebody told me that "Zulafan" is the plural for "Zulfatun" and the plural for "Zulafan" is usually used for numbers that are more than 3. Is this True?It is interesting that God use Zulafan in 11114 ..Can anybody give the explaination of the meaning of word Zulafan
-
Salam wakas..
Thanx for the link. It is very helpfull
But im still stuck in this Solaa thing..
Im the one who belive that there is three Solaa that is Fajr(1st end of the day,time range the name Fajr explain itself), Wusta(2nd end of the day,time range in 177 and Isya(early night, time range in 11114), acording to 11114but your explaination of Zulafan that is plural for 3+ only suite for two Solaa per day(I know most of the forumers here think that wusta=balanced).
The time-range of isha-salat = from rubbing of the sun (i.e. part going below the horizon), including twilight (one adjacent part) AND early night (another adjacent part).
plus it contradict with 1778 if solaa isya starts at the sun rubbing and ends at the darkness of the night.
So what do u think Zulafan mean..
Im Stuck... -
-
peace loli,
plus it contradict with 1778 if solaa isya starts at the sun rubbing and ends at the darkness of the night.
So what do u think Zulafan mean..I dont see how anything I wrote contradicts. Please clarify.
An important point to consider is that according to al quran night includes the twilight
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1212
-
Peace wakas,layth.
I dont see how anything I wrote contradicts. Please clarify.
Im realy sorry, maybe u miss understood me.. Im realy new at this so please correct me if im wrong.
To me Salaa Wusta starts at the rubbing of the sun and ends at the the darkness of the night / the obscure part of the night.(does this includes twilight?)
But as far as 11114 is concern,
"Zulafan(near)* min(from) al-laili(the night)" gives a plural* form of parts of the night that is 3 or more,= the time for solaa Isya' (correct me if im wrong here)wakas have give a great explaination of 3 parts of the night that i have to agree with.
The time-range of isha-salat = from rubbing of the sun (i.e. part going below the horizon), including twilight (one adjacent part) AND early night (another adjacent part)
So does salaa wusta and salaa Isya' starts at the same time ie. "rubbing of the sun" but salaa wusta ends at the darkness of the night and salaa Isya' ends after the early night?
Because if salaa Isya' starts after salat Wusta(ie. the darkness of the night), i cant find any 3 or more parts of the night. This is the problem that been confusing me all week.
Sorry for my bad english.
-
Peace Brother Wakas, Layth, all
Perhaps its confusing you because you are holding the view that there is 3 regular/timed slw AND zulafun is in the plural.
The way i see it brother Wakas, there is 3 times for solaa.
And uphold the salata at the two (tarafay*) edges of daylight (annahaaru) and (wa**) adjacent/near/close parts (zulafun***) of the night (al-layli). The good deeds take away the bad. This is a reminder to those who remember.
*dual form used, i.e. 2. (singular = tarafun, plural = atraafun)
**can mean including, also, together with.
***plural form used, i.e. more than 2. (singular = zulfa)2 at the edges of the day and one at near/nearness of the night
Am i wrong here Brother Wakas,? Please clarify.But im not realy sure about Zulafun is plural word or not, because im dont realy know arabic.
Zulufan as far as the checking I made revealed that its usage in 11114 was 'singular' (not plural).
Maybe Brother Layth could explain a little bit about his studies of Zulufan usage in 11114
Thank You. -
peace loli,
2 at the edges of the day and one at near/nearness of the night
Am i wrong here Brother Wakas,? Please clarify.According to the view I currently hold, yes, I think you're wrong. Please also see the 3 salawat thread where it is also being discussed.
Wakas
-
peace All,
According to the Quranic Dictionary. 'zulafun' is plural.
Furthermore, according to the following analysis by brother Ayman, 'zulafun' is plural.
http//www.geocities.com/learnislamquran/zlf_plural.jpg
According to Lane, if one reads it as "ZuLaFA" then it is plural. Lane also says that "ZuLFA" is plural of "ZuLF(T)". On the other hand, they say that there is an opinion out there that if one reads it as "ZuLuFA" then it is singular. However, Lane is leaning towards it being plural.
I personally find the gender of Arabic words very helpful in solving those types of issues. Hence, another point to consider is that according to Lane the singular (and of course the plural) is feminine. "ZuLFA" doesn't make sense as a singular feminine. If it were a singular feminine then according to Lane it would have been "ZuLF(Y)" (where the Y is pronounced A). On the other hand, "ZuLFA" is an acceptable plural of the feminine "ZuLF(T)" or "ZuLF(Y)". So I would say that the gender provides conclusive evidence that "ZuLFA" is plural.
(whilst I dont fully understand the above analysis, brother Layth should, thus conclude 'zulafun' is indeed plural)
Wakas
-
Peace Wakas,
(whilst I dont fully understand the above analysis, brother Layth should, thus conclude 'zulafun' is indeed plural)
The analysis does not help the issue. Simly because a word carries an "A" at the end does not make it plural.
In-fact, you can see a similar example to the use of "ZulufAn" in 7613 which says "ShamsAn". There is only one Sun (no plural), yet it is written with the "An" at the end.
-
peace Layth,
The analysis does not help the issue.
I'm very surprised at that considering brother Ayman seemed to think that analysis did help clarify things. I even checked with him and he said 'zulafun' was plural.
Simly because a word carries an "A" at the end does not make it plural.
I know that. It is normally a change in infix. (i.e. zulfa to zulaf). This is what I can ascertain
11114 - zulaf
3437 - zulfa
3825 - zulfa
3840 - zulfaHow do you explain the change in infix? (zulaf and zulfa)
293 - zulfat (adverb, noun, accusative)
vb. (IV)
2664 - azlafna (plural)
2690 - uzilfat (sing.)
5031 - uzilfat (sing.)
8113 - uzilfat (sing.)If anyone else wants to contribute, feel free, as grammar is not my strong point.
Wakas
-
Peace all
DICTIONARY HANS WEHR
TARAF (singular) = Utmost part outermost point, extremity, end, tip, point, edge, fringe, limit, border, side, region, area, section,
TARAF min (singular) = A part of, some party (as, to a dispute, of a contract, etc.)
TARAFA (prep.) = with, at, on the part or the side of,
ATRAAF (plural) = ends, tips, points, edges, limbs, borders, sides, regions, areas, extremities, sections, parts.
TARAFAY IN.NAHAAR = in the morning and in the evening, mornings and evenings.
The root of the word ZULUFANN is ZULFA. This word is used in the Quran to mean near or adjacent
"... Those who set up idols beside Him say, "We idolize them only to bring us ZULFA (near/close) to God...." 393
As a result, the phrase ZULUFANN MIN AL LAYL means the NEAR / ADJACENT / PROXIMITY of the night. The obvious question is NEAR TO WHAT? Well, since in the same verse (11114) we are given two points in time (morning and evening / the ends of the day), and also because we read the word ZULUFANN (which is a plural form of ZULFA) thus the words ZULUFANN MIN AL LAYL speak of the parts of the night that are adjacent to the two points in time (those being morning and evening / sunrise and sunset).
If the phrase ZULUFANN MIN AL LAYL was speaking about ONE additional prayer, we would expect to see the word ZULFA (singular) used and not the word ZULUFANN (plural). This confirms that the phrase ZULUFANN MIN AL LAYL is related to the TWO SALAAT at the ends of the day / morning and evening
The adjacent parts of the night are the hours before sunrise and the hours after sunset
Perhaps the word WA (which means AND) that is placed before the phrase ZULUFANN MIN AL LAYL in 11114 contributed largely to the mis-interpretation of this verse. Many have seen the word AND to mean (and an additional Salat), however, the word AND could also be indicating an additional explanation to what came before it and not necessarily an additional Salat. To demonstrate this please consider the following example
If your doctor tells you The time for taking the medicine is at sunset and for the adjacent few hours.... WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?
Does it mean that you must take the medicine at sunset and then take it AGAIN for a few hours? Or does it simply mean that the time you can take the medicine is anytime between sunset and the few hours after that?
Similarly, if God tells us to observe the SALAAT at the ends of the day AND for the adjacent hours of the night, it is the same thing, the word AND here is used to indicate an additional explanation for the time of the 2 SALAAT, and NOT an additional third prayer. The phrase ZULUFANN MIN AL LAYL means that we can observe the Salat during the NIGHT SIDES of the two points of morning and evening / sunrise and sunset.
With reason, it can be proved that this is the ONLY logical explanation of this verse
A command to observe the SALAAT at the two ends of the day (without the inclusion of the phrase ZULUFANN MIN AL LAYL), does not provide us with any indication as to WHEN exactly these two SALAAT are to be OBSERVED. This is because the ends of the day are mere points in time that are no longer than a minute each. Surely God does not expect us to observe the SALAAT only during the few seconds that it takes the sun to rise or set? It is only with the addition of the words " ZULUFANN MIN AL LAYL " in the same verse that the command indicates a time range when these TWO SALAAT should be observed.
To get round this tricky situation some have claimed that we can observe the SALAAT around the two points and not only during the actual sunrise/sunset, but this is equally unacceptable. This interpretation gives rise to a new valid question Does this mean that we may observe the SALAAT anytime before or after sunrise/sunset? Is it only before sunrise/sunset? Is it only after sunrise/sunset?
It is obvious that we would be left without any clues as to when exactly to observe these TWO SALAAT unless we accept the further clarification given by the phrase ZULUFANN MIN AL LAYL. This phrase confirms that it is the night side of the sunrise and sunset that the SALAAT may be observed.
The TWO SALAAT at the ends of the day that are spoken of in 11114 are given specific names in the Quran. They are Salat Al-Fajr (Morning Prayer) and Salat Al-Eisha (Evening Prayer). 2458
?verily the prayer is prescribed unto the believers at FIXED TIMES / HOURS. 4103
Apart from the two PRAYERS, SALAAT Al FAJR and SALAAT Al EISHA and its timings, which are mentioned in the Book (to be observed in the proximity of the night), there is no mention of the timing of the prayer of the Zuhur, Asr and Night.
Remember when this verse was revealed there was no watch to know the 24 hours time and therefore to know the fixed time of the night prayer was next to impossible.
Allah has clearly mentioned the two SALAAT with names and its timings and that can be established without a watch.
The two SALAAT are to be offered in the proximity of the night and this needs no watch. The FIXED watch time OF THE THREE (ZUHR, ASR and EISHA) RITUAL PRAYERS changes round the year but the one mentioned by Allah do not change.
Thanks
-
Peace brother Layth,
The analysis does not help the issue. Simly because a word carries an "A" at the end does not make it plural.
I agree but that was not the argument.
In-fact, you can see a similar example to the use of "ZulufAn" in 7613 which says "ShamsAn". There is only one Sun (no plural), yet it is written with the "An" at the end.
We know from 3437, 3825, and 3840 that ZLFY is a singular form. ZLFA (ending in an actual A) is a valid plural for the singular feminine ZLFY.
Unlike ZLFY, ShMS doesn't end in Y (pronounced A), hence, it is not a valid analogy.
I suggest trying to find an example of a singular feminine form ending is Y (pronounced A) that also takes an actual A in the singular.
In my opinion, "the near part of the night" or "the near parts of the night" both point to the time/times in 7320 (2/3, 1/2, & 1/3 of the night). We also know that the near part/parts of the night is called "nashia'at al-layl" in 736.
The "wa"/"and" in 11114 doesn't denote an additional "sala" no more than the "wa"/"and" in 2238 denotes an additional "sala".
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman.
-
Peace Ayman,
We know from 3437, 3825, and 3840 that ZLFY is a singular form. ZLFA (ending in an actual A) is a valid plural for the singular feminine ZLFY.
Unlike ZLFY, ShMS doesn't end in Y (pronounced A), hence, it is not a valid analogy.
I suggest trying to find an example of a singular feminine form ending is Y (pronounced A) that also takes an actual A in the singular.
Here are two examples for you
-
"Alive" ("HaY" ending with "Y") as occurs in 2255, can be seen still in its singular form but as "HayAN" as in 1931.
-
Another word "god" ("IlA" ending with "A") can be seen as "IlahAN" 2133 while still remaining singular.
All in all, there are examples to support that the word "ZulufAN" is not plural.
-
-
Peace brother Layth,
Here are two examples for you
- "Alive" ("HaY" ending with "Y") as occurs in 2255, can be seen still in its singular form but as "HayAN" as in 1931.
Please notice that 7YA in 1931 KEPT the Y. Hence, according to your example, ZLFY should be ZLFYA and NOT ZLFA. This is not an example of a feminine ending in Y (pronounced A) that also takes an actual A instead of the Y.
- Another word "god" ("IlA" ending with "A") can be seen as "IlahAN" 2133 while still remaining singular.
ILH is masculaine and ends in H not in a Y that is prounounced as A. Hence, again it is not a valid analogy.
All in all, there are examples to support that the word "ZulufAN" is not plural.
I appreciate your patience and perseverence, but actually, once again, you have not shown one example where a singular feminine ending in Y (pronounced A) also takes an actual A instead of the Y.
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman.
-
Peace Ayman,
Please notice that 7YA in 1931 KEPT the Y. Hence, according to your example, ZLFY should be ZLFYA and NOT ZLFA. This is not an example of a feminine ending in Y (pronounced A) that also takes an actual A instead of the Y.
Please review your data as according to my dictionary the singular form is the non-feminine "Zalaf" (not ZulufY as you were stating). In fact, you also skipped the non-feminine occurance of it as "ZulfaT" in 6727. (AzlafnA 2664, UzlifaT 2690, ZulfaT 6727, ZulfA 11114, ZulfYA 3437)
-
Dear brother Layth,
I proposed a good approach that would solidly prove your point by showing one example where a singular feminine ending in Y (pronounced A) also takes an actual A instead of the Y. If you showed me such an example, then I would have accepted your position that ZLFA is singular.
Instead of providing the one example that would have easily proved your point, you change your argument to saying that the supposed noun ZLF and the nouns ZLF(T) and ZLFY are non-feminine.
Please review your data as according to my dictionary the singular form is the non-feminine "Zalaf" (not ZulufY as you were stating).
I am not sure I follow. Let's agree on a standard way to communicate. Please show the Arabic letters using CAPS. Hence, in 11114 it is ZLFA. You can use small letters to show the "tashkeel" (vocalization marks) if you want to. However, the most important part it the actual written Arabic letters.
The supposed noun ZLF doesn't occur anywhere in the great reading. We do have the singular as ZLF(T) (example 6727) and ZLFY (example 3437) and both are feminine.
In fact, you also skipped the non-feminine occurance of it as "ZulfaT" in 6727. (AzlafnA 2664, UzlifaT 2690, ZulfaT 6727, ZulfA 11114, ZulfYA 3437)
I disagree, ZLF(T) in 6727 is definitely feminine because it has the (T) at the end.
2664 and 2690 do not provide good evidence because they are verb forms not noun forms.
We are out to prove that ZLFA in 11114 is singular or plural. Hence, neither you nor I can use 11114 as an example of singular or plural because that would be a circular argument. Moreover, ZLFA is a valid plural of the feminine ZLFY.
3437 DOESN'T have an Alif at the end. It is simply ZLFY (where the Y is pronounced as A). ZLFY is feminine.
Also, please think about the relationship between 7320, 736, and 11114. This is a point that you haven't addressed.
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman.
-
Peace Ayman,
I proposed a good approach that would solidly prove your point by showing one example where a singular feminine ending in Y (pronounced A) also takes an actual A instead of the Y. If you showed me such an example, then I would have accepted your position that ZLFA is singular.
I tried to show you, but your target keeps moving?
Instead of providing the one example that would have easily proved your point, you change your argument to saying that the supposed noun ZLF and the nouns ZLF(T) and ZLFY are non-feminine.
It is not wrong to point out that the question was based on flawed data.
If ?ZALAF? is the original singular form, then it makes no sense to be discussing it as being ?ZulfY? or ?ZulufA? or any other such derivative.
I am not sure I follow. Let's agree on a standard way to communicate. Please show the Arabic letters using CAPS. Hence, in 11114 it is ZLFA. You can use small letters to show the "tashkeel" (vocalization marks) if you want to. However, the most important part it the actual written Arabic letters.
The supposed noun ZLF doesn't occur anywhere in the great reading. We do have the singular as ZLF(T) (example 6727) and ZLFY (example 3437) and both are feminine.
Basic Arabic grammar has the origin of each word based on ?3? letters. The Quran is after all an ?Arabic? book and not vice versa.
Layth wrote
In fact, you also skipped the non-feminine occurance of it as "ZulfaT" in 6727. (AzlafnA 2664, UzlifaT 2690, ZulfaT 6727, ZulfA 11114, ZulfYA 3437)I disagree, ZLF(T) in 6727 is definitely feminine because it has the (T) at the end.
We are out to prove that ZLFA in 11114 is singular or plural. Hence, neither you nor I can use 11114 as an example of singular or plural because that would be a circular argument. Moreover, ZLFA is a valid plural of the feminine ZLFY.
3437 DOESN'T have an Alif at the end. It is simply ZLFY (where the Y is pronounced as A). ZLFY is feminine.
?HayaT? also ends with a ?T? (making it feminine by your definition), yet you refused to accept it as an example of a word that uses ?AN? and remains singular?
?Ilah? ends is a ?H?, yet you refused that also?
If you want a ?Y? then you can try the example of ?NabY? which also occurs as ?NabiAN?.
You can also go for a ?Y? that sounds like an ?A? with ?ZakA?, which also occurs in its singular form as ?ZakiyAN? (1919).
Also, please think about the relationship between 7320, 736, and 11114. This is a point that you haven't addressed.
As far as I have read, and based on all these discussion, 11114 to me is clearly a singular with the ?AN? being a normal grammatical addition in the singular form.
-
Peace brother Layth,
Since you didn't bring a suitable example, I went ahead and found one for us
ThKR, like ZLF can have the following noun forms
Feminine, ThKRY and ThKR(T), and masculine ThKR/ThKRA.
Now, one cannot say "ThKRY kathiratan" or "ThKR(T) kathiratan" because they are feminine singular and not plural. On the other hand, one can say "ThKRAn kathiran" because it is a valid plural form. One can say "ThKRAn wahidan" too because it is also a valid masculine singular form (Notice that the K takes a "sukun" and not a "fat-ha" in that case).
Similarly, one cannot say "ZLF(T) kathiratan" or "ZLFY kathiratan" because they are not plural. On the other hand, one can say "ZLFAn kathiran" because it is a valid plural form. One can also say "ZLFAn wahidan" because it is a valid masculine singular form.
We cannot conclusively say if it is plural or singular. We can only see which is more probable. In other words, what is the most likely scenario?
In this analysis, I am ignoring the vocalization mark on the L in "ZLFAn". If we were to consider the vocalization mark on the L (i.e, the "fatha") and read it as "ZuLaFAn" then it would definitely be plural. If it were singular then it should take a "sukun" like "ThiKRAn" (i.e. it should be "ZuLFAn" and not "ZuLaFAn"). However, you could rightly counter by saying that vocalization marks were not part of the original text and they were added over 300 years later and hence, they reflect later interpretations of the text.
We know two things for sure
-
ZLF(T) and ZLFY are the singular forms used on all the other places in the great reading,
-
If what was meant is the singular, then there is nothing wrong or ungrammatical about saying "ZLF(T)an min al-layl".
Based on these two observations, the most likely scenario is that ZLFAn is plural. However, this is not conclusive because 11114 could very well be the one exception where the singular form in not feminine and the later vocalization mark added on the L could be wrong.
At any rate, my understanding of 11114 is the same whether ZLFAn is plural or singular. It is pointing to the near part/parts of night closest to the edge of the day. These would be after sunset as per 736 and 7320. Hence, 11114 is talking about the edges of the day (dawn and sunset) and the part/parts after sunset. Of course, sunset ---> after sunset is a continuous timeframe. Hence, 11114 is talking about two and not three timeframes.
I hope this helps.
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman.
-
