Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Users
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Free Minds Forum Icon
  1. Home
  2. General Issues / Questions
  3. Questions/Comments on the Quran
  4. Could these be words of a mortal man?

Could these be words of a mortal man?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Questions/Comments on the Quran
12 Posts 3 Posters 18 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • B Offline
    B Offline
    bkanwar2
    wrote on last edited by
    #3

    Will post detailed break down, if needed. All verbs are sentences in Arabic language. Here is a breif response to some one, on another forum, should suffice here as well.

    Badar

    Badar Bhai,

    Are you sure Q 21 means what you wrote ? I thought no one knows for
    sure what does "alif laam meem" mean or stands for?
    Secondly " kitaab " has been translated as " book " for the last 1400
    years. Are you certain without a shadow of doubt that " kitaab " means
    something else , instead of a " book " ?
    Thirdly how do you explain that if the author of Book/Quran is supreme
    being He allowed rampant mistranslation of the book for 1400 years ?
    Didn't it defeat the purpose of revealing a book of guidance ?
    Wrong translation means zero guidance.
    Fourth do you know someone who is willing to authenticate your translations ?

    I apologise but these are blunt questions which merit answers.

    Best,

    Ehtesham

    Ehtesham, no need for apology.

    21
    It is not just three letters. Please check it in printed Quran. It
    is written as first elif has medda over it. It would mean two
    elifs or better hemzas. Followed by Miim has Shadda over it. It
    would again double Miim.

    In Arabic verb has 15 forms. The ninth form is . Now
    replace Fa Ayan Lam with root letter elif Lam Miim one gets .
    Look up root meaning from lexicon. ?He or man suffered pain? It being
    ninth form of verb, further adds meanings of intensiveness with
    permanence to the root meanings.

    Similarly Kitab is from root ?Ka Ta Ba? which means ?he wrote what he
    learned or heard? . Kitab as a word from this root is at measure of
    this measure adds meanings of ?flight from or refusal? of root
    meanings. Hence, I rendered meanings above.

    Now to very important philosophical questions of why and how wrong translations.

    Please pay attention to whole of Universe and progress of knowledge
    and science and laws that apply to this phenomenon.

    Did Newton ever say that I am going to wait for god to come and tell
    me how the laws of motion works? Or put other way around did god come
    running to tell him how?

    People agree that Einstein?s genius is not that he invented or
    discovered laws of relativity. These laws were already discovered
    years before him. He just put these in term for people to understand.
    Did god come running to him or he went running to god to ask him if
    he was correct. He showed the people how he did it. Repeated testing
    of his hypothesis produced same results making it a law.

    Do I know any one to authentic my translation? Well number one, any
    one can do it. I am openly sharing my methodology.

    However, ones who may be capable of doing it, all are running business
    of religion, with vested interests. Do you know any one who is ready
    to spoil his/her thriving business?

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • M Offline
      M Offline
      Mazhar
      wrote on last edited by
      #4

      In Arabic verb has 15 forms. The ninth form is . Now
      replace Fa Ayan Lam with root letter elif Lam Miim one gets .
      Look up root meaning from lexicon. ?He or man suffered pain? It being
      ninth form of verb, further adds meanings of intensiveness with
      permanence to the root meanings.

      You just saw this and arrived at a conclusion.

      http//arabic.tripod.com/VerbForms1.htm

      He has enumerated only 14 Baab of derivative verbs. First is three letter primary Verb having six Baab/Chapters. Derivitive forms are 25, 10 are well known while 15 are uncommon and rare usage.

      He has quoted the Past Verb not the name of Baab. is past verb, third person, masculine, singular. Its Baab is . Look at the first consonant with vowel sign and compare it with the superfluous word you are trying to coin above, calling it a verb.

      In this Baab, Hamza is added in the Past tense, Imperative and Verbal Noun and the last original letter is Mushaddad, by Shadda, and carries a Vowel over it.

      And take care Madda is NOT Shadda.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • B Offline
        B Offline
        bkanwar2
        wrote on last edited by
        #5

        Brother Mazhar, why do you have a tendency to make a simple thing as complicated.

        Please understand this is, what I am saying, according to Wright, at page 29 vol. 1. The derived form of triliteral verb are 15. The ninth form of derived from is .

        If one were to write root into this derived form it will be , this can be legitmatly written, due use of Medda at start and due rule of idgham at end, like .

        This is exactly what, I have in the printed Quran.

        Where is your problem?

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • G Offline
          G Offline
          good_logic
          wrote on last edited by
          #6

          Peace both .

          Forgive me brothers, but both of you are making thing very complicated.

          I am lost?

          I understood " Rocket Science" a bit better!

          Peace.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • M Offline
            M Offline
            Mazhar
            wrote on last edited by
            #7

            Brother Mazhar, why do you have a tendency to make a simple thing as complicated.

            Please understand this is, what I am saying, according to Wright, at page 29 vol. 1. The derived form of triliteral verb are 15. The ninth form of derived from is .

            If one were to write root into this derived form it will be , this can be legitmatly written, due use of Medda at start and due rule of idgham at end, like .

            This is exactly what, I have in the printed Quran.

            Where is your problem?

            I just corrected him and you. See he says "derived forms are 15", while mentions 14, first is not derived form, it is primary.
            There is NO Root in Arabic. It is

            And further read Wright about form 9. Its first syllable is Hamza with Kasra vovwel. Alif is seat for Hamza.
            Further, remember from 9 is about colours and defects.

            Know the difference between Madda with shadda.

            Pl avoid entering irrational adventures.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • B Offline
              B Offline
              bkanwar2
              wrote on last edited by
              #8

              Besides technicalities and nit picking, I do not see any concrete criticism of understanding of orthography or its meanings.

              Don?t you feel a state of permanent and intense suffering due current misbelieves in Muslims is a major defect. I guess one has to be able to perceive the current state correctly to comprehend it.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • B Offline
                B Offline
                bkanwar2
                wrote on last edited by
                #9

                So are you saying there is no Medda at begining or no Shadda at the end over "Meem" or both?

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • M Offline
                  M Offline
                  Mazhar
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #10

                  So are you saying there is no Medda at begining or no Shadda at the end over "Meem" or both?

                  You perhaps did not read the first post. I have cut it from top and reproduce

                  • Alif First Letter, but not consonant, of Arabic alphabet ( &#8206, it has no speech sound and is not conjoined with the succeeding consonants of a word or the following word;

                  • Laa'm and Mee'm Two consonants of Arabic alphabet, conjoined/stitched together; and both have above them, an ancillary glyph/prolongation sign/mark called "Madda" which means and extends/stretches the sound value of the letter to which it is added. The prolongation mark reflects that the following joined letter is still resulting in pause as consonant ends with still resulting in natural pause in its pronunciation "Laa'm". Likewise, the consonant has the prolongation sign suggesting to pronounce it with stretched sound to make the last still letter vivid in sound ending in natural pause "Mee'm- ". Prolongation sign will also appear when the following syllable/consonant with vowel is delicate "Hamza, " which can distinctly and audibly pronounced only when the preceding letter is pronounced elongated. Arabic language equally cares for the convenience of the speaker and the listener. Please remember that the prolongation sign is not the equivalent nor it represents a hamza followed by Alif.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • B Offline
                    B Offline
                    bkanwar2
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #11

                    So in nutshell you are saying that even if it were shown clearly that , is just not three letters, but a word or really a sentence with linguistic proof you would not accept it. Just because you have learned so from your ancestors. Correct? Even though this word's meaning carries lot more sense than just three meaningless letters.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • M Offline
                      M Offline
                      Mazhar
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #12

                      So in nutshell you are saying that even if it were shown clearly that , is just not three letters, but a word or really a sentence with linguistic proof you would not accept it. Just because you have learned so from your ancestors. Correct?

                      This linguistic proof was based upon what? Technical understandigs---that this and this is possible to presume and see three alphabets with two porlongations signs magically adopting shape of a word and sentence.

                      I replied about those "technicalities". But you straightaway rejected.

                      Besides technicalities and nit picking, I do not see any concrete criticism of understanding of orthography or its meanings.

                      Don?t you feel a state of permanent and intense suffering due current misbelieves in Muslims is a major defect. I guess one has to be able to perceive the current state correctly to comprehend it.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Don't have an account? Register

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Users