Translating 2:196
-
I will provide my understanding at the present time, for comparison/review
2196 And complete the conference/symposium and the visit for God. So if you are prevented/restrained (from doing this) then (give) what is easy of the offering and do not relieve/cancel/cut-short your chiefs (of this duty) until the offering reaches its permitted/lawful place (i.e. al bayt al atiq / the liberated/freed house 2233), so whoever from among you was sick or with him (i.e. in addition to you being unable) hurt/harm of his chief (thus you and your chief are unable) then redeem from abstinence/fast or charity or observance. So when safe/secure then whoever benefited/enjoyed in/with the visit to the conference/symposium then (give) what is easy of the offering so whoever couldn't find (a suitable offering) then an abstinence/fast three days during the conference/symposium and seven when you returned, this is ten complete. That is for one whose people are not present (at) the inviolable time/institute of acknowledgement, and be conscious of God and know that God is severe in punishment.
2197 (For) The conference/symposium (are) the months/full-moons well known...*Note how the underlined part is an alternative to giving the offering. Why? Because there is no-one to ensure it gets there (i.e. you and your chief are unable).
I would question why RAS would mean chief in this instance, given that it doesn't appear to mean that anywhere else in the quran (excluding 48/27, which would be circular). I'll concede that it has that possible meaning in Lane's but given it's apparent exclusive use as head everywhere else, I consider this a somewhat forced reading. To add to that, other words are used to refer to leaders in the quran, i.e. malik (2/246), imam (2/124), al-amri (4/83), malau (27/29).
If the chief is harmed, would he not have a deputy?
-
peace Mushu,
Thanks for the detailed reply.
Thanks for the example of 2165. It sounded like an idiom, so I looked up Mustansir Mir's "verbal idioms of the quran" and its listed there, see page 376 of the pdf file "they were thrown off their bearings" is the most apt of the listed. Even if we did not know of this listing, the verb is passive meaning the object received the turning and since it says upon their head, it implies they were turned upon their actual head, i.e. the phrasing suggests something along the lines of their worldview was turned upside down or exposed.
Do not relieve your heads could be an instruction to maintain the conviction/duty/responsibility and not abandon it.
That is what I originally thought, however in addition to "No classical arabic dictionary nor Quran use this word to mean "mind", as far as i know.", I realised if they were prevented/restrained they would not be able to ensure the offering reached its permitted place which resulted in a very impractical translation. So the only alternative was to re-interpret the terms, similar to along your lines, however that resulted in even more problems which I could not resolve.
I'll concede that it has that possible meaning in Lane's but given it's apparent exclusive use as head everywhere else, I consider this a somewhat forced reading.
I would agree IF it were not for the logical and practical implications of the various understandings. I am open to alternatives, but as it stands, from what I have researched and read, this is the most probable understanding thus far.
I'm not sure if I'd consider 1769 as an example of non-physical danger, as the context seems to discuss physical events that would result in physical harm.
can we connect the dots and say that l-hadyu of 2/196 is meant to reach l-bayt where people will receive their bounties?
My current understanding is similar. From my studies "seeking bounty" is always related to real-world activity such as trade, food, provisions etc.
Yes 1412 alludes to different types of harm, and there are many different physical harms. Sure, it does not rule out mental harm but provides no weighting of evidence for it.
2264 is a better example.To add to that, other words are used to refer to leaders in the quran, i.e. malik (2/246), imam (2/124), al-amri (4/83), malau (27/29).
I dont think those words have a tribal chief connotation.
If the chief is harmed, would he not have a deputy?
Perhaps, but if one is making representations, and/or entering into treaties etc of course the chief is best.
At the end of the day, the weighting of an understanding will depend on many issues, perhaps most notably cross-reference, logic, grammar considerations and practicality. I personally have not seen alternatives to 2196 with better viability. If you or anyone has, let us know.
-
peace all,
I am currently writing the follow up to my SuJuD article, and I was able to prove (or at least, heavily weight it in favour of) the translation for 2196 I gave above. Just thought I'd let you all know.
2196 And complete the conference/symposium and the visit for God.
So if you are prevented/restrained (from doing this) then (give) what is easy of the offering and do not relieve/cancel/cut-short your chiefs (of this duty) until the offering reaches its permitted/lawful place,
so whoever from among you was sick (singular) or with/by/in him hurt/harm/annoyance from his chief then redeem from abstinence/fast or charity or observance.
So when (time adverb) you (plural) are safe/secure (i.e. in the designated vicinty) then whoever benefited/enjoyed in/by/with the visit to the conference/symposium then (give) what is easy of the offering so whoever couldn't find (singular) then an abstinence/fast three days during the conference/symposium and seven when you (plural) returned, this is ten complete.
That is for one whose people are not at-hand/present (at) the inviolable time of acknowledgement/SJD, and be conscious of God and know that God is severe in punishment.
2197 (For) The conference/symposium (are) the months/full-moons well known... -
peace all,
I was re-reading my article today and realised the article does not have a dedicated thread (I dont think), which is what I usually do (helps with discussion/reference). So I will just hijack this one and post it here, see link above or
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/Quran-2196-critical-thinking.htmlEven though it only analyses one verse it contains a lot of information, and to this day no-one else (to my knowledge) has ever provided an alternative translation that can answer the problematic questions therein. It's been almost 7yrs.
What I particularly like about the article is that it significantly tests your critical thinking ability, hence its title, AND if the claim is true that only one rendition seems to fit then it holds the juicy possibility we can glean a heck of a lot of info from this one verse.So, that's why I have brought this up. I want students of Quran to read it and come up with your answers and post them here, test the article, scrutinise it, see what you come up with.
-
....but imagining a practical situation is difficult, i.e. the person sends HDY then waits then when someone (we dont know who) returns and tells them yes your HDY did reach where it was sent you may now shave your head they then do so on their say so.
in today's time the one who went with HDY can call me and tell me yes your HDY did reach where it was sent. (not possible in old times)
-
peace,
Mazhar, it doesn't really matter which of 5 alleged texts you're referring to it is, as the idea of the article is real simple
WHATEVER understanding you have, slot it in and see if it resolves the issues presented.
So, in your case, let's say you think it is text type 1, fine, do whatever grammar type 1 has, slot it in and see what results. If there's problems, try text type 2 etc etc.
NF, exactly, but since this Quran command was applicable at that time, we have to consider the consequences of our chosen translation then, as well as now.
-
peace,
Mazhar, it doesn't really matter which of 5 alleged texts you're referring to it is, as the idea of the article is real simple
WHATEVER understanding you have, slot it in and see if it resolves the issues presented.
So, in your case, let's say you think it is text type 1, fine, do whatever grammar type 1 has, slot it in and see what results. If there's problems, try text type 2 etc etc.
NF, exactly, but since this Quran command was applicable at that time, we have to consider the consequences of our chosen translation then, as well as now.
Peace,
In academics, gimmicks are not allowed. Texts are classified by types as are sentences. Each type of text has different type of word choice, and each type of sentence is different by grammatical structure.
Without vocabulary one knows nothing, and without grammar one get little from text; universally accepted rule.
-
Peace,
In academics, gimmicks are not allowed. Texts are classified by types as are sentences. Each type of text has different type of word choice, and each type of sentence is different by grammatical structure.
Without vocabulary one knows nothing, and without grammar one get little from text; universally accepted rule.
A small question on the bolded phrase Accepted by who?
-
Linguists.
Also common sense, for those who know even a little what is language and writing
Well i hope they aren't biased or inaccurate on extreme term. Don't know if i said that correctly.
-
No biases, academic rules are void of biases.
I wonder, what is your linguistic sources? I noticed you mention Ibn Faris a lot which if i am correct, he is lexical author of Maqayis Al-Lugha.
-
I wonder, what is your linguistic sources? I noticed you mention Ibn Faris a lot which if i am correct, he is lexical author of Maqayis Al-Lugha.
Yes, he gives the perception towards which a Root leads. That perception is always included in all the words stemming from that Root.
