Surah : 109 - Al-Kafirun
-
.
Dear Brother nothing personal here. Nothing to gain and nothing against any body. I am in search of truth. I was reading this whole discussion of verb again please see another iirab change again in read. How come so many people were mistaken? Who was right among them? Who decided this issue after prophet was already gone? Is Quran really temper proof like we are lead to believe?
I will work on 560, please note in Lane it is referred as 565. For all those who think verses and suras were decided by prophet on direction of Allah. Here is another example that it is not the case.
Just by typing-writing error of Lane do not jump to conclusions. And remember that Lane was not writing the Lexicon for pleasing Allah the Exalted, he was a hired person who got his living for thirty years just for compiling this Lexicon. And never forget he did not do an original work, he merely translated the Classical Lexicons.
-
Just by typing-writing error of Lane do not jump to conclusions. And remember that Lane was not writing the Lexicon for pleasing Allah the Exalted, he was a hired person who got his living for thirty years just for compiling this Lexicon. And never forget he did not do an original work, he merely translated the Classical Lexicons.
Brother how can you call it as typing error of Lane? He has referances for every thing from original lexicons. Furthermore, that his is just a translation work and no origin from Lane, makes it even so more important and relavant, for questions asked.
-
Typing error because here he is not translating from original but himself quoted the No in parentheses. Perhaps you know that the matter in parentheses is placed by the translator at his own for the convenience of his reader. Pl revert back to the original issue of word being a transitive verb.
-
Appreciate your willingness to continue discussion, despite my percieved stupidities. Very busy for few days, hence will continue this discussion when little more time on hand.
To get to real meanings of Quran, I still think understanding of core message is important. Please commment on this and it's linguitic argument without bringing another verse to translate in the mean time.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599853.0
-
Brother Mazhar I am going address concerns raised by you in two episodes
- Linguistic argument
- Translation of 560 to find how it would turn out, I shall tackle it when more time on hand.
In this just the linguistic argument, your objections followed by my response.
Mazhar In verse
Surah 109 2Neither I am an object of worship, nor are you worshippers or servants.
Brother Mazhar contends that the word is from root from hence its imperfect should have a ?dumma? on its 2nd radical letter in imperfect like .
Furthermore, he contends it is a verb from . The verbs from this are transitive and require an object to convey its meaning. Based upon this he feels meaning of ?I am an object of worship? does not reflect a verbal sentence. Instead it is translated as a nominal sentence. Additionally, he further contends that since it is transitive verb there has to be an object and there is no object in this translation. (Please correct me, if my understanding of your arguments is incorrect)
My Response
-
Brother Mazhar is correct in objecting that the original translation as it stands above. It appears to be a nominal sentence instead of a verbal sentence.
-
Next question is it transitive? The rule for transitive verbs is the most have ?fetha? over 2nd radical letter. But not all verbs with a ?fetha? on second radical letter are transitive.
-
So how else can we find if verb is transitive? By asking question, whom or who or what. For example if I say ?I sat down?, try asking who whom? You can?t have any other answer to question of who, whom, as act is complete and only requires me as subject. Whereas, if I say ?I jumped? you may ask a question, jumped what? There is going to be answer to complete the sentence ?I jumped the fence?.
-
Now let us see what about our word of discussion could be . Just take its simple meaning ?worship?. The word ?worship? in English could be either transitive or intransitive. Similarly, if say ?I worshiped? one may not like to ask who or what. It does convey complete sense.
-
Furthermore, one has to understand who is the subject saying this word. It is our Rabb. Is it not? Does he need an object to worship?
-
Now let us turn to lexicon and discuss the issue and find how easy it is to find out its meaning.
-
Lane almost always starts off by giving meaning of three letter root verb. However, here in this root, he starts of with a verbal sentence (in red below) followed by all nouns (in blue). Interestingly this example verbal sentence can not to be found, as it is, in Quran. Two following nouns he translates are from a root which is intransitive in its form, needing no object at all . Additionally, this intransitive form is the only verb root that he translates as verb and not as a verbal sentence. Two authorities support its existence, one denies. Furthermore, this intransitive form is the only form used in its perfect form and he Quotes from Quran (green) as well. Unfortunately, current printed Quran has its ?dumma? changed to ?fetha?. He cites the meaning of this intransitive verb with reference to Quran being understood as ?becoming an object of worship? (in beige)
1 , aor. , inf. n. (IKtt, L, Msb, &c.) and and " (IKtt) and and , (L,) He served, worshipped, or adored, God; rendered to Him religious service, worship, or adoration (L) or he obeyed God (IKtt) or he obeyed God with humility or submissiveness; rendered to Him humble, or submissive, obedience (IAth, L, Msb) the verb is used in these senses only when the object is God, or a false god, or the Devil. (TA.)"
(IAar, L.) -A3- , aor. , inf. n. and , accord. to Lh and IKtt, but A'Obeyd held that there is no verb to these two ns., He was, or became, a slave, or in a state of slavery or he was, or became, in a state of slavery, his fathers having been so before him; as also . (L.) -b2- Lth read ; explaining the meaning to be, Et-T?ghoot having become an object of worship; and saying that , here, is a verb similar to and but Az says that in this he has committed a mistake. (L.)
-
Now if one can understand Allah= ?One who is not a deity for worship?. It removes biggest barrier, the conceptual barrier in understanding Quran. Plus it helps with above linguistic barriers as well.
-
Finally please try to understand link above ?Linguistic riddle solved?. If you have any linguistic objections to it, please bring those forward.
-
Well, I can't believe my brother invested so time to come up with that nonsense LOL!
In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Say, "O you disbelievers.
"I do not worship what you worship.
"Nor do you worship what I worship.
"Nor will I ever worship what you worship.
"Nor will you ever worship what I worship.
"To you is your religion, and to me is my religion."