Which Qoran ?

Hannibal

Peace all,

I have recently been documenting myself about the origins of Quran. How, when and by whom was it assembled ? Do we have the exact same copy of the word of God in our libraries ?
One of the docuements i've been througt is this one https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVER__C7lhE
It left me with some questions on which i would like to have your input

Since one of the reasons we do not trust Hadiths is the untrusted methods used back then, then why should be considering the method used for assembling the Quran trusted ?
The oldest versions of Quran are composed of the basic letters (without the dots and vowels), how do we trust the way the Quran was dotted later ? http//www.irfi.org/articles/articles_401_450/oldest_quran_in_the_world.htm
The dots and ?vowels? can change a meaning to its complete opposite( for example the 302-3 )
Since arabic is Arabic is a closely related to Aramaic, Hebrew, Ugaritic and Phoenician. Should we be looking into those dictionaries in order to understand the Quran ?
On a the scale of deeds that makes a muslim, where would you place the search into the meaning of Quran ?
If you place it high (as i expect most of you will do) does it mean that God has decreed that all non-arabic speaking converted must learn arabic ?

May God help guide us all

FreedomStands

It would be good to learn Classical Arabic, but it is clearly not necessary in order to meet the standards set by the Qur'an of who enters paradise, as discussed in another thread where I just posted.

Novice

Salaam Hannibal

Since one of the reasons we do not trust Hadiths is the untrusted methods used back then, then why should be considering the method used for assembling the Quran trusted ?

For me content of a hadith is more important to verify with Qur'an.

The oldest versions of Quran are composed of the basic letters (without the dots and vowels), how do we trust the way the Quran was dotted later ? http//www.irfi.org/articles/articles_401_450/oldest_quran_in_the_world.htm
The dots and ?vowels? can change a meaning to its complete opposite( for example the 302-3 )

Quran was completed in the life time of our prophet. There were many people who had memorized it in prophet's life time. The dots and vowels were placed for those who did/do not know Qur'anic language so they could recite it properly. The memorizers of Quran played their role of transmission until Qur'an was available on paper and was widely distributed. Now internet has made it even easy to save it from corruption.

Since arabic is Arabic is a closely related to Aramaic, Hebrew, Ugaritic and Phoenician. Should we be looking into those dictionaries in order to understand the Quran ?

The classic Arabic dictionaries and the language of desert dwellers of Arabian Peninsula are good tools to understand Quran. Problem is when we cannot accept meanings of Qur'anic words and get lost in scholar's interpretations which most of the times are used to propagate certain political view point aiming towards mind control.

On a the scale of deeds that makes a muslim, where would you place the search into the meaning of Quran ?
If you place it high (as i expect most of you will do) does it mean that God has decreed that all non-arabic speaking converted must learn arabic ?

I search Qur'an to get guidance from God. In my opinion scale of deeds gets heavy when we apply Qur'an in our daily life.

Hannibal

It would be good to learn Classical Arabic, but it is clearly not necessary in order to meet the standards set by the Qur'an of who enters paradise, as discussed in another thread where I just posted.

Peace brother FreedomStands,

The question i'm asking is more specific than the one asked in the other thread. I'm asking about people who have accepted the Quran as a the word of God. What to make of the following verses 2530, 4144, 4724, 5417 if one does not speak arabic ?

Hannibal

Peace Novice,

For me content of a hadith is more important to verify with Qur'an.

True that, but shouldn't one verify what he is verifying with ?

Quran was completed in the life time of our prophet. There were many people who had memorized it in prophet's life time. The dots and vowels were placed for those who did/do not know Qur'anic language so they could recite it properly. The memorizers of Quran played their role of transmission until Qur'an was available on paper and was widely distributed. Now internet has made it even easy to save it from corruption.

Do you have any proof that the Quran was written down in the time of the prophet ? If so where are those copies ? Were they written with or without the dots and vowels ?

The classic Arabic dictionaries and the language of desert dwellers of Arabian Peninsula are good tools to understand Quran. Problem is when we cannot accept meanings of Qur'anic words and get lost in scholar's interpretations which most of the times are used to propagate certain political viewpoint aiming towards mind control.

Can you advise me on where to find those pre-islamic dictionaries ?

I search Qur'an to get guidance from God. In my opinion scale of deeds gets heavy when we apply Qur'an in our daily life.

I couldn't agree more

May God guide us all

runninglikezebras

Peace Hannibal,

Peace all,

I have recently been documenting myself about the origins of Quran. How, when and by whom was it assembled ? Do we have the exact same copy of the word of God in our libraries ?
One of the docuements i've been througt is this one https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVER__C7lhE
It left me with some questions on which i would like to have your input

Since one of the reasons we do not trust Hadiths is the untrusted methods used back then, then why should be considering the method used for assembling the Quran trusted ?

They should not be trusted. I have often referred in my posts especially in the code 19 subforum, that the Uthmanic codex is by no means authorized by God. This has influenced the index of surahs and numbering of verses. I do believe however, even in Uthmanic codex format Quran is complete. The other codeces historically only varied in order of surahs.

The oldest versions of Quran are composed of the basic letters (without the dots and vowels), how do we trust the way the Quran was dotted later ? http//www.irfi.org/articles/articles_401_450/oldest_quran_in_the_world.htm
The dots and ?vowels? can change a meaning to its complete opposite( for example the 302-3 )

Again dont trust them by default. The etymology of words - which you refer to in 3. - is most helpful in understanding the correct meaning of those root words who are often loaned/borrowed words linguistically.

Since arabic is Arabic is a closely related to Aramaic, Hebrew, Ugaritic and Phoenician. Should we be looking into those dictionaries in order to understand the Quran ?

I know I use those dictionaries constantly in my quranic studies. I also use etymological sources to assist me in this. If you want some online tool, I can share with you. Just pm me.

On a the scale of deeds that makes a muslim, where would you place the search into the meaning of Quran ?
If you place it high (as i expect most of you will do) does it mean that God has decreed that all non-arabic speaking converted must learn arabic ?

Understanding Quran is a barometer of how sound your concept of faith is. Imho native arab speakers are disadvantaged in understanding Quran. The modern arab language is contaminated with semantics drenched in hadith. Speaking arabic natively is like knowing how to ride a motorcycle the wrong way. If you want to understand Quran one has to unlearn a lot of hadith based semantic associations. Quranic arab can be learned quite easily, just by studying Quran and the aramaic/canaaite roots of the language. This language used to be the lingua franca of the middle east for good reason. It was understood by a majority regardless of what culture they belonged to. This aramaic/phoenician root has influenced pretty much every language currently existing. So there is always some basis of understanding to those willing to understand Quran.

Peace

Hannibal

Peace runninglikezebras,

Would you please recommend me some works, websites of people who have done a study of the Quran meanings based on the origins of the Arabic language or with different way of using the vowels and dots ?

I agree with what you said about native arabic speaking folks like myself. It's a difficult process of reeducation.

However, i would not put "understanding the Quran" high on the scale of things a muslim has to do. Don't get me wrong, it is advised to study the Quran and try to understand its meaning but we will never truly reach as it is stated here 37

If we take into account the possibilities of 'tashkil' using different vowels and dots for every single verse in the Quran and then the possibilities of meaning using Arabic, Aramaic, Hebrew, Ugaritic and Phoenician dictionaries it is obvious that il will take a lifetime of more to get to some kind of understanding of Quran. Most people don't have the luxury of time or even the mental abilities needed to do such a great work.
Since i believe that God is fair, I don't think that that tremendous work is a condition to have faith or to enter his heaven.

May God guide us all

runninglikezebras

Arabic Etymological Dictionary

https//www.academia.edu/4847281/Arabic_Etymological_Dictionary

A dictionary and glossary of the Kor-an, with copious grammatical references and explanations of the text
by Penrice, John, 1818-1892

https//archive.org/details/adictionaryandg00penrgoog

Akkadian dictionary

http//www.assyrianlanguages.org/akkadian/index_en.php

The Foreign Vocabulary Of The Quran

https//archive.org/details/foreignvocabular030753mbp

Aramaic words in the Quran

https//archive.org/details/diearamischenfr00fraegoog

Hebrew

http//www.hebrewatmilah.org/maskilon1/index.htm

Hebrew etymology

http//www.hebrewetymology.com/

Peace

FreedomStands

Peace brother FreedomStands,

The question i'm asking is more specific than the one asked in the other thread. I'm asking about people who have accepted the Quran as a the word of God. What to make of the following verses 2530, 4144, 4724, 5417 if one does not speak arabic ?

2530
Then the Messenger will say "O my Lord! Truly my people took this Qur'an for just foolish nonsense."
31 For so it is that against every prophet We have set up enemies from among those who are lost in sin yet none can guide and give succour as thy Sustainer does!

What is the problem here? Some people take the Qur'an as foolish nonsense (just as you did?) and they do so regardless of the translation or language, while some people have found much guidance in it, in various languages that it has been translated into. Nowhere in the Qur'an does it seem to say it is absolutely necessary to know Arabic completely, but that people have varying degrees of skills and knowledge. In the Qur'an, the character were speaking in their own languages which were not Arabic, and God was translating their words into Arabic, right? Likewise, the message of the Qur'an can be transferred to other communities in other languages they know as best as possible so that they can learn quickly, as there is only so much time, and many people might not be able to learn Arabic but the message is far more important than the language it is in, in my opinion. That is not to say you shouldn't study Arabic, but doing so has even seemed to lead some people astray, so really it has nothing to do with Arabic, but with Allah guiding and misguiding people, even by the same book and language.

4144
And if We had appointed it a Lecture in a foreign tongue they would assuredly have said If only its verses were expounded (so that we might understand)? What! A foreign tongue and an Arab? - Say unto them (O Muhammad) For those who believe it is a guidance and a healing; and as for those who disbelieve, there is a deafness in their ears, and it is blindness for them. Such are called to from afar.

This seems to me to even be encouraging the point I'm making. You don't go with the message to people in a language they don't understand, the translation of the Qur'an has been an important miracle which has allowed the message to become even more widespread and accessible, testing and cursing or blessing whoever it is shown to.

4724
Will they then not meditate on the Qur'an, or are there locks on the hearts?

If you can't ponder of the recitation in Arabic, will you not ponder on the supposed meaning of the revelations in your own language? If you won't ponder that, then is it that there is a lock on your understanding? The answer is, yes (but hopefully not in your case, I just meant in general).

5417
And, certainly, We made the Quran easy as a Remembrance. Then, is there one who recalls?

This seems to stand true even in other languages, as I often recall the verses and messages and themes of the Qur'an throughout the day or constantly and in the language I know.

So, pragmatically, the message would be slowed from reaching people or giving them excuses if Arabic was required. It is best to spread the message of One God and Do Good freely and in all languages, have a translation available, and for those who are willing and able, to study the language.

YET BEHOLD!!!!!!!!!!! THERE ARE THOSE WHO STUDY THE LANGUAGE IN ORDER TO TRY TO FIND DISCREPANCY, TO MISLEAD, AND TO ATTACK THE MESSAGE! THEY ARE THOSE WHOSE HEARTS ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH WHAT THEY READ AND INSTEAD WISH FOR IT TO SAY OTHER THINGS OR TO SAY THINGS THAT TURN PEOPLE AWAY FROM GOODNESS!

What is it those seekers are seeking, when the message has been made easy in their own languages even, and they wish to pry even further, what is it they seek to find or look past or is it that they wish some things were wiped away?

So, one should appreciate the gift of translation, but can, if they are so inclined for any reason good or bad, learn Classical Arabic and look carefully at etymologies, though it may be somewhat pointless if the translations are accepted already, but if it is a mission to try to change the Qur'an's meaning or find deeper meanings or whatever or make things up, then maybe learning Arabic becomes more important to those people.

I believe the Qur'an is a simple message that can be translated rather easily, and that its message is pretty clear cut and that those who want to dispute it have some other issue going on, and should maybe leave the Qur'an alone and write their own book if they find it so unsatisfactory.

Man_of_Faith

All diacritical markers are later additions, except for the madda (&#1570 and the dots on letters, e.g. .

Many copies of Quran have alifs inserted too that are not original, e.g. in the real version does not have an alef and is . It was likely added to "help" pronunciation such as every other intruding addition.

It may not seem to make any difference but it does. is not an object but abstract and an adjective or rather an attribute.

Be well

Hannibal

Arabic Etymological Dictionary

https//www.academia.edu/4847281/Arabic_Etymological_Dictionary

A dictionary and glossary of the Kor-an, with copious grammatical references and explanations of the text
by Penrice, John, 1818-1892

https//archive.org/details/adictionaryandg00penrgoog

Akkadian dictionary

http//www.assyrianlanguages.org/akkadian/index_en.php

The Foreign Vocabulary Of The Quran

https//archive.org/details/foreignvocabular030753mbp

Aramaic words in the Quran

https//archive.org/details/diearamischenfr00fraegoog

Hebrew

http//www.hebrewatmilah.org/maskilon1/index.htm

Hebrew etymology

http//www.hebrewetymology.com/

Peace

Thank you runninglikezebras peace
I'll check them soon

May God guide us all

Hannibal

All diacritical markers are later additions, except for the madda (&#1570 and the dots on letters, e.g. .

Many copies of Quran have alifs inserted too that are not original, e.g. in the real version does not have an alef and is . It was likely added to "help" pronunciation such as every other intruding addition.

It may not seem to make any difference but it does. is not an object but abstract and an adjective or rather an attribute.

Be well

Peace brother Man of Faith,

As you can see in the link i provided, the dots were absent from the oldest versions of Quran.
If you have different sources about the origins/evolution of Quran please share with us.

May God guide us all

Wakas

peace,

Re 1)
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9601390.msg263468#msg263468

Re 2)
How does one verify a truth? This is the same way in which to verify Quran
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9597396.msg191658#msg191658

Re 3)
http//www.quran434.com/study-method.html

Re 4)
http//free-minds.org/mumins (perhaps one of the most important articles on this site)

Hannibal

Peace Wakas,

Re 1)
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9601390.msg263468#msg263468

Basically you're saying we should trust the methodology for assembeling the Quran simply because it is written in the Quran certifies its own authenticity and because the majority of muslims didn't question it ? ???

About the Quran being written down under the supervision of the Messenger Mohamed, is there any proof to this either from history or the Quran ?

Re 2)
How does one verify a truth? This is the same way in which to verify Quran
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9597396.msg191658#msg191658

I totally agree with your post; God's signs are everywhere.
Howerver I don't see how this responds to the issue of 'tashkil' = dots + vowels

Re 3)
http//www.quran434.com/study-method.html

Thanks for the link peace

Re 4)
http//free-minds.org/mumins (perhaps one of the most important articles on this site)

That was an interesting read. It makes a lot of sense to me.
Thanks a lot for the recommandation.

May God guide us all

FreedomStands

What do you think of this?

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9607600.msg370764#msg370764

Man_of_Faith

Hannibal,

Without the dots, e.g. it is nearly impossible to know which letter and pronunciation it is for even a skilled reader. I highly doubt it ever was so. There had to be some difference. I suppose in purely stylistic works they may have removed the dots on the letters, but that was merely for decoration.

But otherwise diacritics such as these are inventions , but clearly appears to be original since it gives emphasis on the language when the speaker wants to highlight on something in a context by holding on to the letter through pronunciation. Compare it to word stress.

I have seen fairly old texts that retain dots on letters.

Be well

Hannibal

Hannibal,

Without the dots, e.g. it is nearly impossible to know which letter and pronunciation it is for even a skilled reader. I highly doubt it ever was so. There had to be some difference. I suppose in purely stylistic works they may have removed the dots on the letters, but that was merely for decoration.

But otherwise diacritics such as these are inventions , but clearly appears to be original since it gives emphasis on the language when the speaker wants to highlight on something in a context by holding on to the letter through pronunciation. Compare it to word stress.

I have seen fairly old texts that retain dots on letters.

Be well

Peace Man of Faith,

As an arabic speaker, i couldn't agree more about the difficulity of reading arabic text without the dots and the vowels.
This is the reason that pushes me to understand when the 'tashkil' of the Quran was made ?

Take a look at what is considered the oldest version of Quran
http//www.masress.com/dostor/28861 (no tashkil)

The page is in arabic but your can simply type an image search with 'oldest copy of Quran'.

May God guide us all

FreedomStands

Many ancient languages were said to be written without separations or indicators with all the letters next to each other.

maybesomethinglikethismakingitverydifficultforsomelaterpeopletoknowwhenthesentencesendornewwordsbeginandthingslikethatbutmaybeitisntsohardafterallonceyougetintothegrooveifyouhaveforexampleinthisentence

Man_of_Faith

Hi again,

Tashkil diacritics are added later to "help" pronunciation. There is no doubt about it. I also think they are not necessary if you know the rhythm of the Arabic language Quran uses. I find they may fool us into believing things not true about the ancient pronunciation as it was meant to be pronounced.

The only markers I consider native with the script are the normal dots on the letters and madda. Everything else including hamza are inventions to aid reading. And the interpreters also inserted alifs not native such as is written in the older manuscripts raising suspicion over how things really are.

Be well

Wakas

peace,

Re 1)
I am simply saying that based on the information we have, there are differences in terms of collection, so it is not right to equate collection of hadith with collection of quran. I believe there is some Quranic evidence for the writing of revelation, and this has been discussed many times on this forum, I recommend a forum search. I cannot recall the specific verses at the moment.

Re 2) and 3)
You asked how do we know if the tashkeel is correct or not, and I implied that the approach will be similar to how one verifies any truth, and I provided some verse references which discuss how to read/study/verify Quran