Shahr/month in the light of the quran

ayman

Peace brother Shuaib,

Sorry I don't have access to al-muheet, but I do have lisaan ul arab and taj ul aroos. I believe you may have looked under the wrong root. Tareekh, for example, is from the root hamza-ra-kha... but there IS a root waw-ra-kha in the lexicons. And as you will see if you look that root up, it relates to softness sometimes related to there being an excess of water. It sounds like you are well-versed in Arabic so I probably dont need to explain to you that alif and hamza are different. Also if you search the section hamza-ra-kha (taareekh) you will not find the word warkh.

Al-Mo7it gives the meaning of wa-ra-kha as "specifying of date" ("7adad tarikh"). You can check it yourself online

http//lexicons.ajeeb.com/

Even Lisan Al-3arab that you have gives one of the meanings of waw-ra-kha as specifying of date and gives the example of dating a written document. I don't see how you missed it. Try to read again carefully with patience and perhaps you will see it.

Any ideas? I'm not trying to be a know-it-all here. Rather, my knowledge is deficient in this sector. But I do know what I know. And if you're going to give me an alternate word for shahr then it should be consistent when checked by other means.

I didn't give you an alternate word for "shahr". The inscription that I provided already gave you the "pre-quranic" term for "month". The meaning of "warkh" as "month" in "pre-quranic" Arabia is proven by physical archeological evidence. Why didn't you read line 3 in the transliteration of the inscription as I suggested? Unless you read carefully and with patience then there is no chance for you to overcome your deficient knowledge in this sector.

Well yes, tasreef ul ayaat is the best way. But obviously, just as both you and I are doing, the language also has to be examined. How can we do that without resorting to things like lexicons?

The lexicons, including Lisan Al-3arab that you have, do say that one of the meanings of "warkh" is to specify the date. It is not my fault that you were unable to read it.

Moreover, the Lexicons, including Lisan Al-3arab that you have, do say that the nomadic Arab tribes called the moon "shahr", therefore I am not bringing up an invented meaning. Moreover, Lisan Al-3arab deals extensively with the etymology of the word "shahr". For instance in the discussion of "shahr", it gives "ash-harat", a derivative of "shahr", as meaning a pregnant woman whose is about to deliver (has a big round belly). It also gives the meaning of "shahira(t)" as a big wide woman. It also gives the meaning of "ash-har" as the bright white color of flowers. Therefore, anyone who is able to read Lisan Al-3arab can see that the etymology supports that "shahr" means "full-moon".

And what did the lexicons do but resort to poems and hadith and other literature to compile the meanings of the roots?

The great reading is our BEST source for contextual analysis of words. Next comes archeological evidence. Although the vast majority of alleged Jahiliya poems have been proven to be a forgery of the Ummayad and Abbasid dynasty, most of the meanings in the dictionaries are correct but should be studied intelligently. I use linguistic analysis of all the available evidence and give the right weight to each type of evidence to figure out the correct meaning. I already demonstrated how the word "shahr" means "moon" and then based on further study of the derivatives, it is most likely to mean "wide/full moon". I also confirmed this with internal evidence from the great reading and from archeological evidence. Hence, I validated and revalidated at least three different ways.

For an excellent primer on alleged "pre-quranic' literature, I advise any serious researcher to study Taha Hussein's book "fi al-adab al-jahili".

I've seen the hilaal several times, honestly, but I am not a moonwatcher. Probably I notice the full moon more, because it is so much more intense. I'm not disagreeing with any of this.

I know that you are not disagreeing because the fact that it is easier to spot the full moon than to spot the new moon is indisputable. You are obviously just arguing for the sake of arguing.

But as far as speculation goes, it's very easy bro/sis, to dismiss someone's arguments and evidences (both of which I have given) and label it speculation. To me, so far you have not provided any reasoning other than you think the full moon is easier to see. That's it. And you claim that I am the one speculating?

Again, it is not my fault that you are unable to read the Lisan Al-3arab that you have and see that it gives the meaning of "shahr" as "moon" and the etymology strongly suggests that it is the wide/full moon.

Now I'm no math genius... but the cycle from new to full is 14 days. 1/14 is about 7%. So the day before and after it should be 93%, right?? lol Come on now, you didn't think you'd pull that one over on me did you?

This does not take a math genius. All it takes is a little bit of patience and carefully looking at things before jumping to a conclusion. It is getting tiresome to have to spoon-feed you even basic information, when with a little patience on your part you would have figured it out on your own. When we are looking for symmetry, we are comparing the two HALFS of the moon side by side. We are not comparing a full-moon to an imaginary full-moon side by side. Hence, in symmetry we are only concerned with half of the moon and we are comparing it to the other half. Hence, the most that half of a moon would be to symmetric with the other half is 85% on the night before or after a full moon. Surely, a 15% difference is easy to spot to anyone who carefully looks at the moon.

Bro, I did not say history is infallible or unquestionable. I too question history. I question the history recorded in hadith that the khulifa-rashidoon argued and fought with each other over who would succeed.

But I dont just blatantly say "Nope.. I reject that." I first say why it can't be true, and WHY someone would create that false history. To malign our sahaba AND to validate later on the struggles that the rulers of Islam committed amongst themselves etc etc etc. (That's just an example). So, by all means, question the history. But please explain WHY would someone change the beginning of the month from full moon to hilaal? What possible gain could they have had from this?? You've eluded this question several times now.

I answered but you were not able to read it because you only see what you want to see. Here is what I said

"If the full-moon was the marker then EVERYBODY would see it and no one would have to rely on the Mullahs to tell us when the fasting period begins."

Absent of a clear marker that everybody can see and WITNESS "al-shahr", the only people who gained are the religious clergy who are the ones who do the witnessing for people and people blindly follow them. Hence, in Egypt, for example, it is the clergy of Al-Azhar who declare when so-called Ramadan is.

If there were a Qur'an with which mountains were moved, or the earth were cloven asunder, or the dead were made to speak, (this would be the one!) But, truly, the command is with God in all things! Do not the Believers know, that, had God (so) willed, He could have guided all mankind (to the right)? But the Unbelievers,- never will disaster cease to seize them for their (ill) deeds, or to settle close to their homes, until the promise of God come to pass, for, verily, God will not fail in His promise.
Say "If the whole of mankind and Jinns were to gather together to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they backed up each other with help and support.

The meanings of these verses (even by this crude translation) is pretty clear. Yet somehow, you derive the conclusion that these verses prove that Quran also refers to other books. In the first verse, Allah is merely saying that even if the Quran could perform miracles they would not believe. In the second verse, it is just stating the fact that humans and jinn together cannot write something like the Quran.

And SOMEHOW, you interpret this to mean that it's referring to some OTHER Quran??? Is it any wonder I chose not to respond the first time??

1331 clearly talks about "a quran/reading" that is hypothetical and NOT the one we have. This is indisputable. I don't know how you can't see that a hypothetical reading that is used to move mountains is definitely OTHER than the great reading that we have.

As for 1788, like many other verses, it clearly demonstrates that the reading is a common noun otherwise it would be ungrammatical to point it out by saying "hatha al-quran"/"this reading" and saying "al-quran" would have been sufficient and more grammatical.

Ooh, getting a bit impatient. Inshallah, when I get time. I am already behind on another brothers request. I will get to it when I can. I'm already spending too much time on this forum!

I thought you said that you had access to dictionaries. If after all those years you don't know the meaning of such an important concept off-hand clearly enough to translate it to others, then just look it up in the dictionaries.

My argument was a simple one. That in my opinion, the hilaal is easy to mark the beginning of the month because it is a big contrast compared to the new moon 1/0=infinity contrast, either its there or its not.

Actually, it is not easy to spot, and that is proven by empirical evidence of the fighting that goes on every year between the Mullahs of each sect about the beginning of so-called Ramadhan. It is not a big contrast because a new-moon is very faint compared to the background night sky and it can be very low on the horizon out of line of sight. Moreover, it is actually there TWICE because there is an identical "hilal" at the end of the month, on the other hand, there is only ONE full-moon.

AND, that's what it seems people have been doing for 1400 years. AND, the Quranic meanings and interpretations based on this understanding seem plausible. Also that if shahr doesn't mean month then what does? I'm not saying that I am infallible... I have no particular feelings towards the existing calendrical system. But if someone proposes something different, it should be convincing.

I already answered your question. Please read carefully the third line of the transliteration of the inscription that I provided the link to, carefully read what Lisan Al3arab and Almo7it say about "shahr" and "warkh" and you will know the answer for yourself.

Peace on who followed the guidance,

Ayman

Wakas

peace shuaib, ayman, all,

During my university degree, I studied some aspects of light detection thresholds in humans and also perception/accuracy of symmetry. Unfortunately, I never read any direct comparisons, as this is quite specific. But based on what I know, I would think that judging a full moon would be easier than detecting a new moon. Obviously, I have no concrete research.
This year, I did try to spot the new moon, but I failed on 3 attempts (15th, 16th, 17th), due to cloud, and surrounding lights on the ground do not help.

Also, if either of you can clarify something, how much % does the moon grow each day between new-moon and full-moon?

Thanks.

Wakas

ayman

Peace brother Wakas,

During my university degree, I studied some aspects of light detection thresholds in humans and also perception/accuracy of symmetry. Unfortunately, I never read any direct comparisons, as this is quite specific. But based on what I know, I would think that judging a full moon would be easier than detecting a new moon. Obviously, I have no concrete research.
This year, I did try to spot the new moon, but I failed on 3 attempts (15th, 16th, 17th), due to cloud, and surrounding lights on the ground do not help.

Your common sense intuition is correct. We ALL (even brother Shuaib) hve seen the full-moon many more times than the new moon. The new moon can only be seen under ideal conditions that are very rare. We should learn something from our own life experience and when we read 2185. When The God tells us "man shahid minkum al-shahr" does He mean "that from you who witnesses the "shahr"" or "that from you who heard from someone who heard from some Mullah that he witnessed the "shahr""?

Also, if either of you can clarify something, how much % does the moon grow each day between new-moon and full-moon?

The % from new moon to full moon doesn't come into play when it comes to looking for spherical SYMMETRY. ONLY the % from HALF moon to FULL moon needs to be figured out. This is for the simple reason that the symmetry is based on HALF the moon not the full moon. In other words, when looking for symmetry, you would be comparing the TWO halfs you are seeing not ONE moon to an imaginery full moon.

The Half moon is approximately 7 days before the full moon. Therefore, assuming linear growth, we can divide 100% by 7 and get approximately %14.3 daily growth in symmetry or half that (about 7%) for the moon to an imginery full-moon comparison. Therefore when looking for symmetry, it is easier to spot the full moon. It is not a coincidence that humans generally associate beauty with symmetry and are naturally attracted to it.

I hope this helps.

Peace and all best wishes,

Ayman.

shuaib

Salam br Ayman,

Even Lisan Al-3arab that you have gives one of the meanings of waw-ra-kha as specifying of date and gives the example of dating a written document. I don't see how you missed it. Try to read again carefully with patience and perhaps you will see it.

By the way, thanks for yet another interesting link. I can see you have very interesting resources that you are using. I hope i dont give the idea I am not interested in learning. I truly am, but I might not just blindly jump onto any bandwagons either.

I have checked lisaan al arab thoroughly. I have it right here. Volume 1, page 113, hamza-ra-kha. Here are all the words listed (my version is nice because each word is red so you can't miss them), taareekh, arrakha, aarakha, muaarikh, arkhu, irkhu, urkhee, aaraakh, iraakh, arkha, irkha, urkhee, ... irakh, arkh.. ends halfway down page 114. There is no warkh to be found whatsoever. And I am sure anyway that you know that in grammar alif/waw/ya are vowels which sometimes transform in the same root but hamza does not. Taareekh is from hamza, not waw.

But of course then that leaves us with the question of what that archeological piece was saying. One problem I have is that I cannot read it myself. But I trust the transliteration in this case. Honestly, I think it must be a term that was used in a certain region that was never used widely.. what other explanation can there be? The lexicons DO mention a word warkh, and it has nothing to do with time or month. And as you also know, in Arabic one word cannot have 2 roots.

Everything the lexicons say seem to say that shahr is used to refer to the month. I know that the lexicons refer to the moon as shahr too. As you also know, whenever you examine a root you find out all the nuances of a word... shahr does refer to the moon... you are extrapolating though to say it means FULL moon. I don't see that anywhere.

Again, it is not my fault that you are unable to read the Lisan Al-3arab that you have and see that it gives the meaning of "shahr" as "moon" and the etymology strongly suggests that it is the wide/full moon

Well that's an ignorant thing to say about me. But anyway, the entymology explains that the moon is called shahr because by it, the beginning of the month becomes clear or obvious or proclaimed. Obviously, to you this means full moon since to you the full moon should be the beginning/proclamation of the month. To me it's not since I view the beginning as the hilaal.

And as for me being unable to read... let me ask you... what does the section in the lexicons tell you about the word hilaal oh great reader of lexicons? WHY is the hilaal called the hilaal? See how obvious the ARABS thought the hilaal was, before drawing your conclusions based on what YOU think of the hilaal.

Surely, a 15% difference is easy to spot to anyone who carefully looks at the moon.

As far as the math here, I see your point, it was just a difference in our terminology. But my point is that you are dealing with a 7% sliver of the full moon, either its there or not there. Honestly, there are times when I see the full moon and think that is definitely full. And other times I see it and honestly I am not sure.

I'm interested in actually taking a picture of the full and 1 day minus moons and surveying people to see if they can pick it out.

Then I would have another survey with pictures of the new moon (that is, black) and a picture of the hilaal... and see if they can pick the difference out.

Which do you think will be more accurate?

"If the full-moon was the marker then EVERYBODY would see it and no one would have to rely on the Mullahs to tell us when the fasting period begins."

Unless as I surmise, the full moon ISNT easier to pick out. And we know in the deserts, where even the stars were followed closely... something as bright as a hilaal, coming right AFTER a day when there was nothing, should be visible and indeed is. Again, see lexicon for meaning of hilaal.

And what makes you think Mullahs tell us when to fast? Usually there is a team of people delegated to be on the lookout... and here in the US often it is just people from the community. Of course since it is an important event people might feel power-hungry and want to do it themselves including power-hungry mullahs. But even in places like Egypt and Syria, this is obviously something mullahs go out and do but a number of community people do as well. But since there is a head of the religious community, regardless of who sees it, he announces it.

But in this day and age, we could merely use calculations and we would know way in advance even when the full moon would be and when the hilaal would be, without even having to physically see it.

I thought you said that you had access to dictionaries. If after all those years you don't know the meaning of such an important concept off-hand clearly enough to translate it to others, then just look it up in the dictionaries.

I do indeed have access but time is the problem. I am getting sidetracked into these discussion and I want to deal with ONE first before the other. Starting a discussion on the Quran is an ENTIRELY separate issue bro.

I will respond to the Quran issue and your verses hopefully before or during the weekend, when I have to respond to another brother as well.

wassalam

ayman

Salam brother Shuaib,

I have checked lisaan al arab thoroughly. I have it right here. Volume 1, page 113, hamza-ra-kha. Here are all the words listed (my version is nice because each word is red so you can't miss them), taareekh, arrakha, aarakha, muaarikh, arkhu, irkhu, urkhee, aaraakh, iraakh, arkha, irkha, urkhee, ... irakh, arkh.. ends halfway down page 114. There is no warkh to be found whatsoever. And I am sure anyway that you know that in grammar alif/waw/ya are vowels which sometimes transform in the same root but hamza does not. Taareekh is from hamza, not waw.

You are looking under the wrong root. Please look carefully under W-R-Kh NOT A-R-Kh. You will see that the last meaning given is specifying a date and the example of the dating of a document is given. You can see that in the link that was provided

This was the last meaning given under W-R-Kh in Lisan Al3arab. Moreover, you can check Al-Mo7it for the root W-R-Kh and you will see that "specifying of date" ("7adad tarikh") is given as a meaning.

But of course then that leaves us with the question of what that archeological piece was saying. One problem I have is that I cannot read it myself. But I trust the transliteration in this case. Honestly, I think it must be a term that was used in a certain region that was never used widely.. what other explanation can there be?

Please read the context of the inscription carefully before making baseless assumptions. This inscription was intended as public NEWS much as today's newspapers are intended. It is unlikely that they would use terms that only a few people would understand, it is certain that those who wrote it tried to use language that can be understood by most people.

Moreover, the inscription is dated to around the time the prophet could have been born.

The lexicons DO mention a word warkh, and it has nothing to do with time or month. And as you also know, in Arabic one word cannot have 2 roots.

That is because you are not reading them carefully and are missing the meaning given by BOTH Lisan Al3arab and AlMo7it under the root W-R-Kh.

I know that the lexicons refer to the moon as shahr too.

That is all you need to acknowledge. Now, which is more likely to fit the other nuances of "shahr", full or new moon?

As you also know, whenever you examine a root you find out all the nuances of a word...

Please follow your own advice and look at the other nuances of "shahr" and its derivatives in Lisan Al3arab. Aren't wide, full-figured, big, public some of those nuances?

Moreover, here is what Lisan Al3arab says

Which is likely to be more "famous (seen by everybody) and obvious" as Lisan Al3arab says, the full moon or the new moon?

shahr does refer to the moon... you are extrapolating though to say it means FULL moon. I don't see that anywhere.

Based on the nuances as you suggested then wide, full-figured, big point to the full moon and NOT the new moon. You gave me really good advice so please follow it yourself.

I'm interested in actually taking a picture of the full and 1 day minus moons and surveying people to see if they can pick it out.

Then I would have another survey with pictures of the new moon (that is, black) and a picture of the hilaal... and see if they can pick the difference out.

Please do and in fact I encourage everybody here to do so on the next full moon (which should be next week) and see how easily they can make it out. By the way, good luck getting a picture of the new moon, you will need it.

Salam,

Ayman

David

Salam Wakas, Ayman, Shuaib, all,

The moon does not grow linearly between new moon and full moon.
To find the percent visibility, check out

http//aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/MoonFraction.html

Also of interest to this discussion, from the following webpage, it can be seen that discerning a full moon up to two days from the actual full moon can be very difficult

http//aa.usno.navy.mil/faq/docs/moon_phases.html

"Although Full Moon occurs each month at a specific date and time, the Moon's disk may appear to be full for several nights in a row if it is clear. This is because the percentage of the Moon's disk that appears illuminated changes very slowly around the time of Full Moon (also around New Moon, but the Moon is not visible at all then). The Moon may appear 100% illuminated only on the night closest to the time of exact Full Moon, but on the night before and night after will appear 97-99% illuminated; most people would not notice the difference. Even two days from Full Moon the Moon's disk is 93-97% illuminated."

Also regarding spotting the hilal

http//aa.usno.navy.mil/faq/docs/islamic.html

"The visibility of the lunar crescent as a function of the Moon's "age" - the time counted from New Moon - is obviously of great importance to Muslims. The date and time of each New Moon can be computed exactly (see, for example, Phases of the Moon in Data Services) but the time that the Moon first becomes visible after the New Moon depends on many factors and cannot be predicted with certainty. In the first two days after New Moon, the young crescent Moon appears very low in the western sky after sunset, and must be viewed through bright twilight. It sets shortly after sunset. The sighting of the lunar crescent within one day of New Moon is usually difficult. The crescent at this time is quite thin, has a low surface brightness, and can easily be lost in the twilight. Generally, the lunar crescent will become visible to suitably-located, experienced observers with good sky conditions about one day after New Moon. However, the time that the crescent actually becomes visible varies quite a bit from one month to another. The record for an early sighting of a lunar crescent, with a telescope, is 12.1 hours after New Moon; for naked-eye sightings, the record is 15.5 hours from New Moon. These are exceptional observations and crescent sightings this early in the lunar month should not be expected as the norm. For Islamic calendar purposes, the sighting must be made with the unaided eye."

Here is another website which shows the phases of the moon

http//www.stardate.org/nightsky/moon/

Seems easier to determine if something is or is not visible, as opposed to determining perfect symmetry.

peace

Wakas

peace David,

Thanks for the pics. Judging by the statements, neither option seems to be significantly easier than the other.

On that last link, there seemed to be 3 days without anything (12, 13, 14) and potential full moons on 2 days (27, 28 ), although the days either side of these two days were very similar.

Wakas

Grourself

Peace,

I?ve been following this very interesting discussion and when I finished I was left with these observations. I was becoming confused. If we keep in mind words like ?easy?, ?clear? and a message for ?all? mankind something is wrong with all our ideas. We are letting Arabic dictionaries and grammar books dictate what is the correct manner of expression rather than the author of the Reading, in this case God. When access to Taj, Moheet, lisan al arab etc. is required for a correct understanding a huge sector of mankind is left out and we attribute infallibility to these resources. I?m not discounting the need for a reference or definition but they can only be a basis not the defining authority. We are also applying preconceived notions about what these words are saying. We are depending on history writers and arab cultural practices to interpret the message rather than the message itself. The Book is its own grammar book, its own dictionary and its own history lesson, not vice versa.

I think we are missing the only important resource, the force God has described as jibr-il. It was hard to shake out of my head what I?ve understood all my adult life but when I questioned each verse as to things like ?who is the audience? I began to get a very different understanding. Here are some of my thoughts on this topic

297 "Say, anyone who opposes Jibril, thus it is he who transmits it upon YOUR heart with God's will confirming with whatever in between its hands - and guidance - and good news for the righteous"

The audience is mankind. Jibril is still obediently carrying out its assignment of putting the understanding and the message into the hearts of those who would be guided. It is not only for the messenger.

If we can link the nature of how the Quran is transmitted in 297 with 2185 - then we are told to impose on ourselves only when we "witness" the time. It never says "in remembrance of the time" but it emphasizes "anyone who witnesses". Logically that is the time when the Quran is transmitted - and the months can happen at any time of the year. No one witnessed when the Quran was transmitted to the last prophet - because in 26192-194 it says the Quran was transmitted into his heart. When we say "witness" we must be able to see or to have the proofs. People may ask, how do we witness that the Quran was revealed to us? The answer is in the 2186. Once we receive the knowledge about the Quran - we would have knowledge about God. He tells us, "And when My servants ask you about Me - I am always near. I respond to the call of any caller who calls Me. Therefore you shall RESPOND TO ME AND BELIEVE ME - and that they may attain GUIDANCE". The only way to respond and to believe in God is through the Quran - not through fasting but through abstention. So abstention is applicable at the time when we receive the knowledge about the Quran - and it does not happen every year. There is always a good reason when we do something in life. God must have a good reason when He tells us to do certain thing. Similarly, we must ask - why do we have to abstain? Is it because of the month or is it because the Quran?

The instruction in verse 2187 is about sexual contact only - and the self abstinence is only restricted during the day not the night. When you are devoted in the submission you shall not approach them. The submission or act of compliance for this abstinence will be clearly explained as you read on. All over the Quran God asks us to eat and drink - even Mariam was told to eat and drink when the word "Saum" is used. There is nothing in the verse about looking to the sky for threads or not eating. It is about clearly understanding this injunction.

I find the word shahra is used by the Author as plural, as in English the word decade, singular, relates to a period of 10 years and decades are periods of ten years. Shahra is months, and ashuhru, months Perhaps the grammar books disagree?

Rama-dhana whichever meaning you accept is a descriptive term, not the name of a specific month.

Without moving ahead and mixing injunctions about other things with what these verses tell us, there is no yearly fast of ramadhan and no moon watching. It is the same deen and message all the prophets received. It is simple and straightforward and clear. When men ?changed? the words in the message before do we understand that they ?changed? the words of God when He says, ?none can change His words?? He never tells us that He will stop men from ?changing? the words in the Qur'aan, they have the same ability to effect corruption they always possessed but the preservation and understanding have been assigned to His faithful servant Jibril. It has always done it?s job and the words of God have never been changed. When we look at the signs in creation we become convinced of God. Have you never asked yourself that WHY with all the obvious corrupted explanations and confusion you are convinced that the reading is divinely inspired and you search for the true meanings? Ponder 297.

The message in 2187 is easy if we pause as we read

2187
It is permitted for you on the nights of abstaining - the sexual contact (see 2197) to your women. They are confidantes for you and you are their confidants.

God knows indeed you - that you have wronged yourselves ? thus He pardoned on you and He forgave it from you ? accordingly - now - MAKE THEM HAPPY (see 4223) ?

and you shall seek whatever is written by God for you.

And eat and drink until it is apparent/clear for you as the white thread (see 3527) from the black thread ?

FROM DAWN ? then - abstain yourself to the night. And THEY ARE NOT HAPPY and you are DEVOTED in the submission.

That is the limit of God - thus YOU SHALL NOT APPROACH THEM.

That is how God explains His signs for mankind so that they carefully observe.

The large font is so much easier to read for folks my age. Hope some of you guys take my lead lol

Idris

peace, Grourself

973 agrees with month being plural in 2185

I have the same understanding as you, mz, and Aidid Safar have at the moment, that 2183-187 are merely instructions on how to abstain and the "fixed" days are 2196, I will be writing a huge article on this soon

thanx for your thoughts

shuaib

Salam Ayman and David,

thank you for your posting David. As your post demonstrates, it is hard to see the hilaal, but it is even harder to discern the exact date of when the moon is full. I did not realize it was not a linear progression. Some months there is only 1% difference! Thank you for educating all of us on this point!

Now bro Ayman, I have to say that still I think up to this point you have been putting forward a coherent argument... but I think at this point you also are so carried away with your own viewpoint, that you are not doing the detective-work that you ought to.

Please read the context of the inscription carefully before making baseless assumptions. This inscription was intended as public NEWS much as today's newspapers are intended. It is unlikely that they would use terms that only a few people would understand, it is certain that those who wrote it tried to use language that can be understood by most people.

Allow me to demonstrate that you have not done the detective work, and WHO is the one that is making baseless assumptions.

"Although echoes of the glorious past and great achievements of the Sabeans and other peoples of the south would continue to resonate in the literature of the Arab Muslim world throughout its long history, scholars of Arabic literary history have always focused their attention on the nomadic northern Arabs in their accounts of how this literature arose. The overriding reason for this is a linguistic one the tongue used throughout the Arab world today, and known as fusha or "Standard Arabic," is the same language used by these northern Arabs, crystallized in its written form in the revelations of the Qur?an as recorded in the early 600s C.E..
Though the major southern language, Sabaic, and Arabic are closely related to one another, they are definitely separate languages, as different as modern-day English and German, and probably just as often mutually unintelligible as not. Sabaic is almost certainly the older of the two languages, being used for inscriptions as early as 600 B.C.E., while the first evidence we have of Arabic as a written language occurs 900 years later, in an inscription dating to 328 C.E. When the two languages mixed and met after the rise of Islam, however, Northern (Mudari) Arabic--backed by the religious authority of the Qur?an--supplanted its older cousin completely as a language of high culture. Sabaic survives today only in isolated pockets of territory where various dialectical versions continue on a purely spoken level. Written communication in the south is all in Mudari Arabic."

http//www.indiana.edu/~arabic/arabic_history.htm

The full text can be found at the above link. But the excerpt should explain it all, that as I suggested to you, the language though closely related, is NOT Arabic.

And that also explains WHY we cannot find the word warkh as YOU describe it in the lexicons.

I have checked hamza-ra-kha. I have ALREADY checked waw-ra-kha. I have the physical lexicons in my hands, not web versions. The section on waw-ra-kha is only a few lines long. And as I said before, it defines warkh as having to do with softness due to excess wetness. See taj ul aroos vol 2 page 384 about 4 lines worth, and lisaan ul arab vol 15 page 267 about 6 lines worth. I can SCAN the pages and send them to anyone who doubts this.

Now finally, I purposely asked you to provide the meaning of hilaal which you purposely did not. THAT would tell us what the Arabs thought of the hilaal, rather than what you thought of it. Here is the meaning

The fundamental meaning of ihlaal is to raise ones voice. Raghib has written that the occurence of the hilaal was proclaimed in a loud voice. It is also used to refer to proclaiming anything loudly.It is also sometimes used to label the first rain of a season. Also the same lexicons you refer to are littered with refereces to how the hilaal is the moon at the beginning of the month.

From this one can conclude that it was an event that was proclaimed loudly amongst the Arabs, and why? Because it was the beginning of the month... and analogously was used to describe the first rain. A wholly consistent meaning of the root.

So linguistically, historically, and now scientifically thanks for br david, we must conclude that the month begins with the hilaal.

wassalam

Grourself

peace, Grourself

973 agrees with month being plural in 2185

I have the same understanding as you, mz, and Aidid Safar have at the moment, that 2183-187 are merely instructions on how to abstain and the "fixed" days are 2196, I will be writing a huge article on this soon

thanx for your thoughts

Peace Idris,

I am eager to read it! It took me nine months to reason out those few verses. 183-203, only 20 verses but I broke them into 115 phases. I didn't question Aidid because I wanted to understand without any outside influence. I thought I disagreed with him until he explained what he meant using different words. We were in total agreement. Now by my count I only have about 36,000 phrases to go shock

ayman

Peace David, all,

"The visibility of the lunar crescent as a function of the Moon's "age" - the time counted from New Moon - is obviously of great importance to Muslims. The date and time of each New Moon can be computed exactly (see, for example, Phases of the Moon in Data Services) but the time that the Moon first becomes visible after the New Moon depends on many factors and cannot be predicted with certainty. In the first two days after New Moon, the young crescent Moon appears very low in the western sky after sunset, and must be viewed through bright twilight. It sets shortly after sunset. The sighting of the lunar crescent within one day of New Moon is usually difficult. The crescent at this time is quite thin, has a low surface brightness, and can easily be lost in the twilight. Generally, the lunar crescent will become visible to suitably-located, experienced observers with good sky conditions about one day after New Moon. However, the time that the crescent actually becomes visible varies quite a bit from one month to another. The record for an early sighting of a lunar crescent, with a telescope, is 12.1 hours after New Moon; for naked-eye sightings, the record is 15.5 hours from New Moon. These are exceptional observations and crescent sightings this early in the lunar month should not be expected as the norm. For Islamic calendar purposes, the sighting must be made with the unaided eye."

Here is another website which shows the phases of the moon

http//www.stardate.org/nightsky/moon/

Seems easier to determine if something is or is not visible, as opposed to determining perfect symmetry.

Thanks for providing the link.

The full-moon in picture 27 is not only perfectly symmetric but is equally bright on both sides. If one draws a line cutting the moon in half on the moons number 26 and 28, one will see that they are not perfectly symmetric. Moreover, the moon on the 26 is darker around the left edge than the right edge while the moon on the 28 is darker on the right side than on the left side. ONLY the moon on the 27 is equally bright on both edges. So not only symmetry but equal brightness on both edges clearly point to the full moon. On the other hand, even with optimal conditions the crescent will be seen about one day after the actual new moon.

Remember, it is those who witness "al-shahr" that must abstain NOT those who were told by someone who was by some guy who was told by a Mullah that he witnessed "al-shahr".

Peace and all best wishes,

Ayman

ayman

Salam brother Shuaib, all,

Allow me to demonstrate that you have not done the detective work, and WHO is the one that is making baseless assumptions.

Proper research and detective work involves more than typing an Internet search on Google and copying and pasting from a link. One has to read information intelligently and critically.

"Although echoes of the glorious past and great achievements of the Sabeans and other peoples of the south would continue to resonate in the literature of the Arab Muslim world throughout its long history, scholars of Arabic literary history have always focused their attention on the nomadic northern Arabs in their accounts of how this literature arose. The overriding reason for this is a linguistic one the tongue used throughout the Arab world today, and known as fusha or "Standard Arabic," is the same language used by these northern Arabs, crystallized in its written form in the revelations of the Qur?an as recorded in the early 600s C.E..
Though the major southern language, Sabaic, and Arabic are closely related to one another, they are definitely separate languages, as different as modern-day English and German, and probably just as often mutually unintelligible as not. Sabaic is almost certainly the older of the two languages, being used for inscriptions as early as 600 B.C.E., while the first evidence we have of Arabic as a written language occurs 900 years later, in an inscription dating to 328 C.E. When the two languages mixed and met after the rise of Islam, however, Northern (Mudari) Arabic--backed by the religious authority of the Qur?an--supplanted its older cousin completely as a language of high culture. Sabaic survives today only in isolated pockets of territory where various dialectical versions continue on a purely spoken level. Written communication in the south is all in Mudari Arabic."

http//www.indiana.edu/~arabic/arabic_history.htm

The full text can be found at the above link. But the excerpt should explain it all, that as I suggested to you, the language though closely related, is NOT Arabic.

Firstly, if you have done the proper research, you would have found that Sabaic is generally classified as an OSA (Old Southern ARABIC) dialect. On the web site that you refer to there is actually a MISSING picture which shows that Sabaic is part of the Southern Arabic DIALECTS not LANGUAGES. It is like Egyptian and Saudi Arabian dialects are BOTH Arabic and an Egyptian can understand MOST of what a Saudi says and vice-versa. Unfortunately, the graph link is broken but I know what it has because I have seen the original article published elsewhere.

The Sabaic dialect does have some differences to Northern Arabic dialects, however, once you know those difference then it becomes easy to match it to Northern Arabic. For example, in Sabaic the definite article is post-posed not pre-posed. You will see the definite article as an extra "n" at the end of a word compared to the "al" at the beginning in Northern Arabic dialects. Hence, Rahmanan is Al-Rahman. This archaic feature may have been the precursor of "tanween" in later Arabic.

Secondly, most of the research on Sabaic has only been done in the last 20 years so researchers are still developing their view of how this southern ARABIC dialect fits in the big picture. Hence, some people view that Sabaic is a completely separate language while others view that it is a dialect of Arabic. This confusion is clear in the fact that Deyoung, the author of the article, says that they are CLOSELY RELATED and YET DEFINITELY SEPARATE, which is an oxymoron (a contradictory statement). The fact is that they can't be completely separate and at the same time closely related. Moreover, if even 15 centuries later, you and I can make out most of what a transcription of the inscription says than a contemporaneous Arab would have certainly understood it far better than us.

Thirdly, and most importantly, we must use the great reading as the criteria because we know for sure that it is in a clear ARABIC language. Does the Sabaic inscription use words that are found in the great reading and in Arabic dictionaries?

We find that that answer is a resounding YES.

Doesn't the inscription speak of "Rahman", which is one of the names of The God in the great reading?

Doesn't it speak of "masu7ahu" (His Massiah) and other quranic terms such as "tawd" (mountain) (2663)?

Interestingly, Northern Arabic inscriptions call The God Allah/Al-Ilah and NEVER Rahman while Southern Arabic inscription call Him Rahman. We also hear from the great reading in 17110 that there were some people who called The God, Allah and others who called AlRahman. Hence, The God is resolving the differences by telling them that both are best names. So clearly, the great reading was addressed to BOTH Southern Arabs and Northern Arabs and used terminology from both dialects.

Interestingly, even after the great reading, in a few bilingual Northern Arabic - Greek and Latin inscriptions you see that the Arabs translated Rahim in "bism Allah Alrahman Alrahim" but not Rahman. This indicates that there continued to be some confusion on the meaning of Rahman on the part of the Northern Arabs because it was a Southern Arabic term. This confusion continues to this day, because from the inscription and the great reading Rahman means Almighty but from the Arabic dictionaries it is explained wrongly as merciful/compassionate.

And that also explains WHY we cannot find the word warkh as YOU describe it in the lexicons.

You are unable to find it because you are unable to read and here is the proof

I have checked hamza-ra-kha. I have ALREADY checked waw-ra-kha. I have the physical lexicons in my hands, not web versions. The section on waw-ra-kha is only a few lines long. And as I said before, it defines warkh as having to do with softness due to excess wetness. See taj ul aroos vol 2 page 384 about 4 lines worth, and lisaan ul arab vol 15 page 267 about 6 lines worth. I can SCAN the pages and send them to anyone who doubts this.

It is there in Lisan Al3arab and here is the full text copied from the Web version

. ; . ;

Moreover, here is what Al-Mo7it says

Anyone can check the online Lexicons that I provided the link to under the root W-R-Kh and see what you somehow missed and hence I have to spoon-feed you here. You are once again only demonstrating that you are unable to read or you only read what you want to read and are blind to the rest.

Now finally, I purposely asked you to provide the meaning of hilaal which you purposely did not. THAT would tell us what the Arabs thought of the hilaal, rather than what you thought of it. Here is the meaning

The word "hilal" doesn't occur in 2185. Had the verse said "man shahid minkum al-hilal falyasumh", then you would have a point. Therefore, you are bringing a word that is not in the verse to try to force your preconceived understanding.

Peace on who followed the guidance,

Ayman

shuaib

Salam Br. Ayman,

Thanks for your response. You know, through this discussions bits and pieces of who you are come through and you do seem to be a very interesting person. Hopefully the fact that we are on opposite sides of the fence on this particular issue does not sour you. And hopefully the touch of arrogance I am perceiving is only in my mind.

Our discussion has taken several fronts so I will respond in separate sections on those fronts.

SCIENTIFIC

Up to this point, we both assumed a linear progression and the discussion was whether or not we could pick up a 7% difference in the full moon or 85% symmetry (50% on one side and 43% on the other side).

However, if you examine br David's link, not just the pretty pictures but the data of PERCENTAGE illumination, you will find that the day before and after full illumination there is at most a 3% different (94 % symmetry) and very often only a 1% difference (99% symmetry). Surely you don't claim that you can tell if something is 99% versus 100% symmetric?

LINGUISTIC - SHAHR, HILAAL

Now in your last post you said

The word "hilal" doesn't occur in 2185. Had the verse said "man shahid minkum al-hilal falyasumh", then you would have a point. Therefore, you are bringing a word that is not in the verse to try to force your preconceived understanding.

Well I didn't refer to the Quran though did i? The discussion was whether or not the hilaal began the month.

Now, as I said and as you agreed to, it does not specifically say in the lexicographal entry on shahr, that shahr refers to full moon. You do claim that the nuances suggest full moon.

However, in the SAME lexicon, if you check under the heading of hilaal, you find that the Arabs themselves felt that the HILAAL denotes the beginning of the shahr, and that was the purpose of my reference. That is why the hilaal is called the hilaal. It's linguistic evidence of what the month begins with.

Linguistic - WARKH/SABAIC

As far as the lexicographal meanings go, bro I think we have a slight miscommunication. I now understand what your intention was to say, but it was different from what I was trying to say.

In the Arabic language, roots are a cornerstone of understanding words but WORDS are what is spoken/written, not roots. The meaning of the word warkh is provided, and it does not mean month. And in the entire description of the root, there is no mention of timing or month.

BUT, as you underline and now I understand what you meant to imply, taareekh is the common word for history BUT very uncommonly (according to the lexicons) the word used is tAWreekh, with waw instead of hamza.. from this obviously you can also get the word warrakha instead of arrakha.

The lexicons claim that this is a peculiarity in the language that arises from a small minority changing the hamza for a waw when it comes to those particular words.

For you to pretend that it's a common sense conclusion and that this means warkh simply refers to month and is totally interchangeable to arkh is a gross oversimplification at best and misleading at worst. I did not comprehend that THIS is what you were trying to use to justify your meanings, and frankly it is a great stretch to claim that this implies warkh is used in Arabic to denote month. The meaning of warkh is clearly completely different and tawreekh is mentioned as a peculiarity of the language.

As far as the Sabaic language, it seems that I underestimated your knowledge on the field but that is only because you so grossly oversimplify things. You COULD have mentioned that there are some people that do consider OSA and ONA to be different languages as I was initially suspecting, but then provided the info you did in your last post. I dont know enough about the topic to refute anything you said, but your claim that saying 2 languages are closely related but definitely separate is not necessarily an oxymoron. But then I guess it depends where exactly to draw the line between dialect and separate language. I have heard languages that are considered to be dialects of Urdu, and they were very difficult to make out though I could understand some of it. Anyway, it is still true that in dialects there MAY be some words that are not used in the other dialect. Also, the use of the word warkh for month, if this TRULY was a commonly used term throughout Arabia for month then it would be mentioned in the lexicons in that regard, JUST as shahr has been described as also meaning month. As I described above, it would not be mentioned as a peculiarity of the language in the word tawreekh/warrakha only.

Hence, Rahmanan is Al-Rahman. This archaic feature may have been the precursor of "tanween" in later Arabic.

Well, in my grammar book nahwa-al-wafi it describes this noon so apparently it's already established, but obviously in opposite usage compared to OSA.

Rahman means Almighty but from the Arabic dictionaries it is explained wrongly as merciful/compassionate.

Rahman doesn't mean almighty, and merciful/compassionate meanings are completely unwarranted if you look at the lexicons, and as far as i can tell was taken from christians.

Very interesting point though about 17110.

Ok well finally, I do have ask if you take shahr to strictly mean full moon, then do you take 2185 to mean to only fast on the night of the full moon? Obviously you must intend by full-moon the month indicated by the moon.

The only way I am aware of that Allah has indicated months or amount of time shorter than a year is by shahr (warkh is not in the Quran in any form). Whether it was ramadan/fasting, the sacred months not to fight, or 936 where Allah explains there are 12 shahr in one year, and even 3412 where to translate shahr strictly as full-moon would lead to an absurd meaning (it's stride was a full-moon).

Anyway, I don't mean to try your patience by this reply and I do respect your beliefs/thoughts. Hopefully we will be on the same side of the fence more often on other topics.

wassalam

marie

Peace all,

If we believe that the month of ramadhan is one of the four restricted month, then the verse 2189 is clear, the new moons are a timing mechanism for the people and not full moon.

Here the occurences of the word alqamara/the moon 677, 96, 754, 124, 132, 1433, 1612, 2133, 2218, 2961, 3129, 3513, 3639.

Allah often speaks about the sun and the moon at the same time. I think the word 'alqamar' represents the full moon which appears in stages until it returns to being like an old curved sheath/date-stalk;it is a logical evolution

Full moon----> 2)manazil (stages)----> 3)crescent like an old curved sheath.

And the moon We have measured it to appear in stages, until it returns to being like an old curved sheath.

Allah knows best

Marie

unknownuser

Peace be upon you all,

Does anyone think the following reminder gives us any further clues?

(251) And remember We appointed forty nights for Moses...

What are these forthy nights?

unknownuser

Salaams all,
if the translation is up to scratch then just see how allah mentions the "FULL MOON"

Waalqamari itha ittasaqa
And the Moon in her fullness

Salaam.

unknownuser

Peace be upon you MZ,

Transliteration Waalqamari itha ittasaqa
Y.Ali And the Moon in her fullness
R.Khalifa And the moon and its phases.
Pickthal And by the moon when she is at the full,
Shakir And the moon when it grows full,
Literal And the moon when/if it organized/evened/gathered.

I am not sure what this verse is saying about the moon, but I am leaning further and further towards Aymans understanding.

EVERYTHING in life is cyclical, everything goes by cycles.

It is beginnig to make prefect sense to me that the phases of the moon tell us about debating(hajj) while the full moon suggests time for us to abstain (it seems from sexual contact) during the days.

When we add the full moon of the hot time, I think about the play by Shakespeare which is called 'MIDSUMMER NIGHTS DREAM'. This play is just another teaching about the Summer Solstice, where people would meditate for those days.

Here is a quote I found on a website

""Full Moons that occur close to the summer solstice are special because they follow the lowest path across the sky of all of the year's full Moons." explains Dr. George Lebo, a NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center Summer Faculty Fellow. "Moons seen just above the horizon look much larger than normal. It's an optical illusion, of course, but it's still a pretty sight."

Just brainstorming out loud hoping someone will make sense of all this.

unknownuser

Salams idol,

you said
"Does anyone think the following reminder gives us any further clues?

(251) And remember We appointed forty nights for Moses...

What are these forthy nights?"

We appointed for Moses thirty nights, and completed (the period) with ten (more)...........(e.t.c)
145.

And We ordained laws for him in the tablets in all matters, both commanding and explaining all things, (and said) "Take and hold these with firmness, and enjoin thy people to hold fast by the best in the precepts soon shall I show you the homes of the wicked,- (How they lie desolate)."

Isn't that when moses prepared the tablets ,i believe making and writing laws -hatched in stone couldn't be easy and requires a lot of time.

Salaams.

marie

Salam MZ, all,

Salaams all,
if the translation is up to scratch then just see how allah mentions the "FULL MOON"

Waalqamari itha ittasaqa
And the Moon in her fullness

Salaam.

Another verses which can bring an additional information

7116 And made the moon a light therein, and made the sun a radiant lamp.

Moon/Full moon through stages becomes ---->2)Crescent-------->3) Full moon invisible------->4) First new moon (hilal, singular form of ahilat 2189)------>1-----2)--------3)-----4) Second new moon.

We know Alhajj is in the months (ashhurun ) which have been appointed (2197) and the new moons are a timing mechanism for the people as well as for Alhajj (2189); we witness the four restricted months while witnessing the new moons. We witness the first restricted month at its beginning and no at its end. There is not any mention of full moon in these verses.

One cyle is between two new moons in the light of 2189

....................Full moon...................... Full moon........................

New moon....................... New moon..................... New moon

.....................Cycle 1.............................Cycle 2.......................

Marie