Resolve the confusion--pronoun in 16:66 and 23:21
-
All translators religiously following the traditional exegeses relate the masculine singular pronoun and feminine pronoun to feminine plural noun occuring in exactly identical first sentences in both Ayahs.
I could not find any rule in Arabic grammar to agree with all of them. Can you reconcile?
Salaam,
This is how I understand it
1666 is talking about LABNAN of AlAN3AAMI
2321 is talking about MANAFI3U of ALAN3AAMISalaam,
Bender -
But how would you explain/substantiate your understanding?
Salaam,
Difficult question.
I can not explain it in technical terms at the moment, it's just how the ayaats are structured.
But let me try to say it in my own words
Both ayaats consist of 2 part where the second part starts at Nusqikum.
The focal point of the second part (from Nusqikum and further) is BOTUN, and what comes after that is related to BOTUN.I hope you understood my thinking.
Salaam,
Bender -
Salaam,
This is how I understand it
1666 is talking about LABNAN of AlAN3AAMI
2321 is talking about MANAFI3U of ALAN3AAMISalaam,
BenderSalam,
Both are incorrect since there can be no explanation for it. The second is totally incorrect because MANAFI3U is the subject of a new sentence beginning with Waw and before it is FeHa-feinine pronoun
-
Salam,
Both are incorrect since there can be no explanation for it.
Salaam,
What do you mean with there can be no explanation?
The second is totally incorrect because MANAFI3U is the subject of a new sentence beginning with Waw and before it is FeHa-feinine pronoun
There is no new sentence after the WAW, it's just part of a sentence. MANAFI3U refers back to MIMMA FI BOTUUNIHA, that why the FIHAA is used.
Salaam,
Bender -
Salaam,
What do you mean with there can be no explanation?
There is no new sentence after the WAW, it's just part of a sentence. MANAFI3U refers back to MIMMA FI BOTUUNIHA, that why the FIHAA is used.
Salaam,
BenderNo explanation means that the suggested translation is not backed by the rules of the language of source text.
A sentence in the text is like a Protein wherein 22 amino acids are in a special sequence whose boundary is determined by the "start amino acid" and "stop amino acid". Similarly in Arabic language there are "start words" to know from where a sentence begins.
Waw is one of the most frequently used "start word".In Arabic language, equivalent to 22 amino acids, there are 22 case endings for a noun which define their role in the sentence. MANAFI3U is in nominative case which tells us that it is the subject of a new sentence beginning with Waw.
-
Salaam,
This is how I understand it
1666 is talking about LABNAN of AlAN3AAMI
2321 is talking about MANAFI3U of ALAN3AAMISalaam,
BenderSalaam,
I found these understandings to be not correct. Sorry.
But in both the aayaat the word used is means what? To me it means, stomach or middle/center. Whose stomach is the question!If stomach is referring to , then the use of along with is correct. But then how is also used with ?
The only option left is and both could refer to a plural unlike Arabic grammar. And again it confirms that alQuraan is not based on Arabic grammar rules.
The exact same pattern is used for Maryam, where in 2191 and in 6612 is used.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path pr
mmKhan -
Peace mmkhan,
And again it confirms that alQuraan is not based on (traditional) Arabic grammar rules.
This is correct. You cannot use the science of grammar of scholars because they are based on centuries of conjecture. It is dangerous to rely on what is known about "Quranic" grammar and the words contained therein and then interpret it. One has to research very much from scratch and read like they are complete beginners to it. Experienced of Arabic may have an initial advantage, but it will not avail much if they do not criticize their own understanding even if it sounds so much like their mother tongue now 1400+ years after it was composed. Just look on certain clownish examples and their interpretation and see that there is something fishy about it. Take the lame interpretation of ketaab for instance. This word may be used as book now in the 21st century and several centuries before, but it is a miserable misfit when placed within the Arabic discourse.
The right interpretation of is even known by men but they disregard it. It is pretty common to translate it as decree, but for some reason it varies in meaning and in conjunction with alketaab it suddenly is transformed into a book, more specifically "the book". Why is that? Why is it not 'the decree'?
Red Inserted word to reinforce what you meant.
Have faith
-
The only option left is and both could refer to a plural unlike Arabic grammar. And again it confirms that alQuraan is not based on Arabic grammar rules.
All physical realm is governed by rules. Language is no exception. Without rules, chaos is the outcome. One's failure to comprehend does not mean that rules are of no relevance.
-
Mazhar,
I think he forgot to add traditional grammar rules in the original post.
All physical realm is governed by rules. Language is no exception. Without rules, chaos is the outcome. One's failure to comprehend does not mean that rules are of no relevance.
Yes. The grammar and language in Qur'an is built around rules. But not according to biased scholars.
-
The exact same pattern is used for Maryam, where in 2191 and in 6612 is used.
Peace --
2191 and the one guarding private part hers so blew we in her (i.e. Mary) from spirit ours and we made her and son hers sign to the creations
6612 and Mary daughter Imran the one guarding private part hers so blew we in him (i.e. Imran) from spirit ours and truthful she in words lord hers and written his and was (f/s) from the devout
-
No explanation means that the suggested translation is not backed by the rules of the language of source text.
Salaam,
Not sure what translation you are referring to.
If you mean with the rules of the language, the Arabic school grammar then I agree.
There are a lot of verses which contradicts the Arabic school grammar but they fit perfectly in the Quranic "grammar".A sentence in the text is like a Protein wherein 22 amino acids are in a special sequence whose boundary is determined by the "start amino acid" and "stop amino acid". Similarly in Arabic language there are "start words" to know from where a sentence begins.
Waw is one of the most frequently used "start word".I never take WAW as a beginning of a new sentence BUT a prolongation of the previous sentence EXCEPT when WAW is used at the beginning of a verse.
In Arabic language, equivalent to 22 amino acids, there are 22 case endings for a noun which define their role in the sentence. MANAFI3U is in nominative case which tells us that it is the subject of a new sentence beginning with Waw.
That whole part you mentioned has no meaning without the previous part ( ) because of the FEEHA. Therefore it's not a new sentence but prolongation.
Salaam,
Bender -
Salaam,
I found these understandings to be not correct. Sorry.
Salaam,
You don't have to be sorry )
But in both the aayaat the word used is means what? To me it means, stomach or middle/center. Whose stomach is the question!
No I do not think that's the correct question. It is clear that the ayaat talks about ALAN3AAM.
The HAA and HI are not referring to ALAN3AAM but to MIMMA FI BOTUN.
I know it's hard to understand because it goes against traditional grammar, but give it a try to understand what I am saying.If stomach is referring to , then the use of along with is correct. But then how is also used with ?
The only option left is and both could refer to a plural unlike Arabic grammar. And again it confirms that alQuraan is not based on Arabic grammar rules.
BLUE Totally not agreed, this makes the book unclear and is an contradiction.
The exact same pattern is used for Maryam, where in 2191 and in 6612 is used.
Yes I know these 2 verses. I wanted to mention them earlier but not sure if it is of the same sort, have to study it a bit more.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path pr
mmKhanMay Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path pr
Bender -
Mazhar,
I think he forgot to add traditional grammar rules in the original post.
Yes. The grammar and language in Qur'an is built around rules. But not according to biased scholars.
Will you please quote one or two rules built in Qur'aan and one or two rules of "biased scholars" which are at variance with those of Qur'an. Be specific.
-
The HAA and HI are not referring to ALAN3AAM but to MIMMA FI BOTUN.
I know it's hard to understand because it goes against traditional grammar, but give it a try to understand what I am saying.You are partially correct that masculine pronoun does not refer to ALAN3AAM. Feminine pronoun Ha refers to ALAN3AAM. You are correct that masculine pronoun refers to Milk singular masculine object.
It is exactly according to grammar of Arabic. , I will explain it later. Let me tell you that the traditional as well as the Modern translators have little cared for the grammar rules. They just follow old translations by merely substituting a word with some synonym here and there.
I hope you had given a little thouht to my post wherein I gave example of 22 amino acids. Now I give you another similarity
The "physiology" of translation of a discourse/text is like human physiology digestive system. During digestion two main processes occur at the same time
Mechanical Digestion larger pieces of food get broken down into smaller pieces by tearing, slicing, churning and mixing while being prepared for chemical digestion. Mechanical digestion starts in the mouth and continues into the stomach.
Chemical Digestion several different enzymes break down macromolecules into smaller molecules that can be more efficiently absorbed. Chemical digestion starts with saliva and continues into the intestines.
A dollop of food put in the mouth can be equated to a sentence in a discourse. The objective of digestion is to acquire necessary nutrients and energy for sustaining the life. The objective of translation of Grand Qur'aan is to acquire guidance embedded in its sentences for living an upright life which will ensure pleasurable continuance of life for ever.
Mechanical Digestion is like parsing the sentence, breaking it down into pieces of smallest grammatical unit parts of speech and morphological structures; segregation of phrases.
Chemical Digestion is like syntactical parsing of the sentences wherein the role and function of each grammatical unit of the sentence is determined in relation to other elements of the sentence. This process yields the semantic information embedded in the sentence. Application of this process upon the entire discourse will provide all the necessary ingredients for sustaining life as the digestive system eventually provides all the amino acids, sugars, fatty acids and glycerol.
A sentence is the part of a speech or a written discourse that has a complete and independent meaning. Sentence segmentation refers to identifying sentences in a text. The process of sentence segmentation is a basic step for discourse analysis because text stream need to be separated into coherent sentences in order to enable effective analysis for information retrieval, summarization, understanding and translation.
-
You are partially correct that masculine pronoun does not refer to ALAN3AAM. Feminine pronoun Ha refers to ALAN3AAM. You are correct that masculine pronoun refers to Milk singular masculine object.
Salaam,
If I'm partially right then I like to know on what I'm wrong.
It is exactly according to grammar of Arabic. , I will explain it later. Let me tell you that the traditional as well as the Modern translators have little cared for the grammar rules. They just follow old translations by merely substituting a word with some synonym here and there.
I hope you had given a little thouht to my post wherein I gave example of 22 amino acids. Now I give you another similarity
GREEN To be honest I don't know anything on amino acids, I don't even know what they are.
The "physiology" of translation of a discourse/text is like human physiology digestive system. During digestion two main processes occur at the same time
Mechanical Digestion larger pieces of food get broken down into smaller pieces by tearing, slicing, churning and mixing while being prepared for chemical digestion. Mechanical digestion starts in the mouth and continues into the stomach.
Chemical Digestion several different enzymes break down macromolecules into smaller molecules that can be more efficiently absorbed. Chemical digestion starts with saliva and continues into the intestines.
A dollop of food put in the mouth can be equated to a sentence in a discourse. The objective of digestion is to acquire necessary nutrients and energy for sustaining the life. The objective of translation of Grand Qur'aan is to acquire guidance embedded in its sentences for living an upright life which will ensure pleasurable continuance of life for ever.
Mechanical Digestion is like parsing the sentence, breaking it down into pieces of smallest grammatical unit parts of speech and morphological structures; segregation of phrases.
Chemical Digestion is like syntactical parsing of the sentences wherein the role and function of each grammatical unit of the sentence is determined in relation to other elements of the sentence. This process yields the semantic information embedded in the sentence. Application of this process upon the entire discourse will provide all the necessary ingredients for sustaining life as the digestive system eventually provides all the amino acids, sugars, fatty acids and glycerol.
A sentence is the part of a speech or a written discourse that has a complete and independent meaning. Sentence segmentation refers to identifying sentences in a text. The process of sentence segmentation is a basic step for discourse analysis because text stream need to be separated into coherent sentences in order to enable effective analysis for information retrieval, summarization, understanding and translation.
Thank you for your thoughts!!!
Salaam,
Bender -
Salam Bender,
Would you like to quote one verse which contradicts the Arabic school grammar specifically referring its rule?
Salaam,
BLUE I don't know any grammar rule by it's arabic or english name, so no I can not do that. But I can give you a looooooooooooooot of verses which I am sure are going against arabic school grammar.
You have to know that there was no grammar book included with the Quran. Grammar rules are man made not from Allah. This book is NOT made to fit arabic school grammar, It has it's own rules, structures, patterns, spelling etc etc etc independent from any human intervention.
Salaam,
Bender -
Peace,
You must also consider the possibility that the book called Quran had been laying forgotten for extensive years and the language forgotten to some extent and also that there was no standard of written language at the time. Muhammad (or what his name was) must have understood what he wrote, any person would write it the way he writes/speaks a language). Then someone retook its interpretation and could not really understand what it, ie. misinterpreted a lot and added diacritical marks to the best of their ability to preserve what they believed was right and also added verse numbers which often cut the sentences in the middle of clauses (which is a strong reason to suspect that they did not fully comprehend what they read).
When people came closer to each other with modern institutions standards became more common and a more collective way of using language in written form.
And if you deliberately take the interpretation of a word in any direction away from how it once was interpreted then you can cause it to 1000 years later connote an entirely different thing. It is clear that the words of Quran are deliberately used to justify a lot of senseless rituals and practices despite that no connotation can support it. With it you get praying birds and all matter of ridiculous inconsistencies. But most people just put the blind eye towards it and continue because to them the traditional interpretation is never wrong (they think) no matter how lame it sounds. They contradict themselves when they say to you "So you believe that billions of Muslims do wrong?" when God said "If you obey most people on Earth they will lead you astray because they listen to conjecture and only guess". Salat is such phenomenon, never criticized if it means prayer or not. Some have said it connotes connection/bond/tie but yet insist on prayer and also while there is a clear word that means pray/request/call/summon/implore that is "duwa/duah" and which is circumstantial and not timed. On the other hand there is glorification in the morning and evening.
And repeating the same passages, seven ones, several times is as if God will hear them better due to their many words and read chapters with 'say' commands directed towards people who do not believe and who do not hear the prayer anyways.
Have faith
-
Peace --
2191 and the one guarding private part hers so blew we in her (i.e. Mary) from spirit ours and we made her and son hers sign to the creations
6612 and Mary daughter Imran the one guarding private part hers so blew we in him (i.e. Imran) from spirit ours and truthful she in words lord hers and written his and was (f/s) from the devout
Salaam brother,
Thank you for your contribution.
But I am sorry to disagree with your understanding of 6612. I don't understand how Imran came in all of a sudden. The part of that aayat before is about Maryam and the part after that also referring to her.There might be something we are missing, inshaAllah we will come to know when Allah wants us to know.
Salaam brother MoF,
Thank you.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path pr
mmKhan