Ramadhan inevitably a proper noun?
-
There are several instances of a proper noun being not fully inflected in the Quran, such as makkah in 4824, dam in 234, ysuf in 127, and in 4163 there are 4 instances ibrhm, ism'l, isq, and ya'qb.
The reason they aren't fully inflected is because all of the words you mention are borrowed/foreign words. The vocalisation on foreign words and inflection or non-inflection is meaningless. Reading into them is a certain path to misunderstanding.
Eg makkah in 4824 can't be explained etymologically with Arabic. It can however be explained etymologically using aramaic. The only conclusion you can make about those words not being inflected is they have a foreign (non Arabic) origin. If you want to understand if they are proper nouns or not one should look at the donor language.
Ramadhan however is a proper arabic word. Referring to the non-inflection of foreign words in Quran is comparing apples to pears. They don't abide to the same rules.
It is very common in many languages that when a foreign word gets imported into another language the inflection gets lost. Sometimes it gets carried over. In any case it's a mistake to draw conclusions from the inflections applied.
In many inflected languages, such as Greek and Russian, some nouns and adjectives of foreign origin are left uninflected in contexts where native words would be inflected; for instance, the name Abraam in Greek (from Hebrew), the Modern Greek word ble (from French bleu), the Italian word computer, and the Russian words , kenguru (kangaroo) and , pal'to (coat, from French paletot).
But all this is beside the point. Uq was using examples of not fully inflected proper nouns in Quran that have foreign origin with a not fully inflected word that has arabic origin. The whole argument of uq was in that sense quite deceiving.
I for one am totally unconvinced ramadhan is a proper noun. I'm even less convinced it is the name of month based on a hadith funded calendar.
Peace
-
peace rlz,
The reason they aren't fully inflected is because all of the words you mention are borrowed/foreign words. The vocalisation on foreign words and inflection or non-inflection is meaningless. Reading into them is a certain path to misunderstanding.
Eg makkah in 4824 can't be explained etymologically with Arabic.
I recommend reading the links in my previous post, and
= Miim-Kaf-Kaf = Sucking, Sucking up, Absorbing, drinking up, Destruction/Destroying, diminishing, diminution/failing; failure, to cast, to throw away, to discard, to straighten/tighten or impede/restrict, to beseech/ask/accept, crowding, competition (izdihaam). Makkah (city of).
makkah n.f. 4824
Source ## http//ejtaal.net/aa/#q=mkk
-
Aramaic m?kkQ?, ?low? is to me the valid origin of the Quranic makkah. This understanding is supported exactly by it's non full inflection, which is a clear indication of etymological foreign origins - Aramaic. In this sense I don't even understand makkah to be anywhere related to modern mecca but that's a whole different debate.
http//i.imgur.com/nMV1kJj.png
I disagree though with the author it refers to modern day Mecca, but is a general placename for a valley most likely the valley of baca. See 1437 and 396
Peace
-
But all this is beside the point. Uq was using examples of not fully inflected proper nouns in Quran that have foreign origin with a not fully inflected word that has arabic origin. The whole argument of uq was in that sense quite deceiving.
If I am guilty of deceit, then I ask God to purify my heart of deceit.
If I am not guilty of deceit, then I beg the pardon of all forum members for what may have been perceived as deceit.
My reference to a noun's being barred from full inflection was made because in Classical Arabic syntax, being barred from full inflection can indicate one of nine things; one of which is the quality of being a proper noun.
There are instances in the Classical Arabic tongue where a noun is barred from full inflection while not being a borrowed foreign word, e.g. usmah (a proper noun for the genus of lions), amzah (a proper noun for the genus of lions), fimah (a proper noun for a female human derived from م, umar (a proper noun for a male human derived from ر, analah (a proper noun for a male human derived from the name of a tree), and salm (a proper noun for a female human derived from all these words take neither tanwn nor kasrah for they are proper nouns.
Said nouns were termed by the early Grammarians as "coined" (ٌ because they are derived from triliteral roots but their forms and meanings are irregular, and so to indicate their irregular derivation, they are debarred from full inflection.
Similarly, "raman" is a proper noun debarred from full inflection derived from the root .
With regard to the etymology of "raman", I have no issue with the use of etymology to gain a greater understanding of the origin of words, though I do not grant etymology an estate within the domain of syntax.
The reader is best referred to primary sources. Please see the following for a Grammarian's perspective on proper nouns
Wright's Arabic Grammar, volume 1, pages 234-246.
Howell's Arabic Grammar, volume 1, pages 5-18. -
There are instances in the Classical Arabic tongue where a noun is barred from full inflection while not being a borrowed foreign word, e.g. usmah (a proper noun for the genus of lions), amzah (a proper noun for the genus of lions), fimah (a proper noun for a female human derived from م, umar (a proper noun for a male human derived from ر, analah (a proper noun for a male human derived from the name of a tree), and salm (a proper noun for a female human derived from all these words take neither tanwn nor kasrah for they are proper nouns.
These exceptions support your thesis way better. I do think you should take etymology into account before analyzing syntax. Foreign origin of words often lead to exceptions to syntax that have no other meaning than the misunderstanding of the person writing them and not recognizing them properly. As such one has to be careful to make conclusions from the inflection of them. A good example is the import of the word Iblis, in the case of iblis the import occurred through a channel that did not understand the 'di' part of the original diabolos to be meaningful and thus suppressed it.
ps at this moment of writing I haven't crosschecked the etymology of any of the words you quoted, I will try to do so and if I find what you say is not valid I will get back to you. At first glance they look valid but not-quranic.
Peace
-
@uq do you have any Quranic examples of non-borrowed words that support your thesis?
You have to understand the only valid proof of what you are saying will be examples of other proper nouns inside Quran (not borrowed) that show the same symptom.
Peace
-
I'd say using Quranic examples to demonstrate your case is pretty fundamental, uq. You say these are the rules of grammar of Classical Arabic. If this Classical Arabic truly is the grammar of Quran one should use quranic words to prove their rules of grammar are quranically sound.
The examples you gave are as far as I know, non-quranic. I'm still expecting some case study of yours using quranic arabic words (not borrowed) that proves your thesis.
What about this verse
2183 O you who have believed, decreed upon you is fasting as it was decreed upon those before you that you may become righteous
To me this confirms the tradition of fasting was known to the Jews.
Peace
-
2183 O you who have believed, decreed upon you is fasting as it was decreed upon those before you that you may become righteous
O you who have believed, decreed upon you is "saum" AS IT WAS DECREED UPON THOSE BEFORE YOU that you may become righteous
So it was decreed on ALL those before us right?
In china japan canada in the jungles ...e.t.c where have they all gone if they where those who where fasting..............or can it be something else good,kind people are doing all over the globe???
just thinking with an open mind.
peace
-
Crosschecking the occurrences of qablikum http//corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=qbl#(218312), one will notice this is most of the time used to refer to those before Muhammad who were given the Scripture.
So, no in my opinion this is not ALL those before us, it refers to those to whom "saum" was decreed. These are the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Ishmael etc.
Eg see http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=5&verse=5#(551)
"those who were given the Book before you"
alladhna t l-kitba min qablikum
I think it's obvious this excludes people in china, japan, canada, the jungles etc. At least as far as I'm aware there were no Jews there in that time.
Peace
-
But surely people all over the world did fast and did so for religious reasons and for God's sake, also they did rceive revelations. So Qablikum may refer to those mentionned int he Qur'an because they were indeed en some way of the same tradition as those who are addressed certainly not because they were the only ones who received scriptures or did fast, who are all over the world and the Qur'an in no uncertain terms says have received their messengers and warners.
If it is said qablicum it is because they do know by themselves thorugh their own traditions, but not because God did not address or enjoin saawm to others.
Salaam
-
Peace Timur, others,
Very interesting discussion.
Any examples of proper nouns in the reading that clearly carry descriptive information about that noun?
How about "Muhammad"?
Peace
-
Good example. Ramadhan is descriptive. Not a noun though in the sense of a proper month name. Ramadhan as a name for a month is a hadith-fabrication. For the contemporaries of Muhammad there was no such thing as a month named Ramadhan.
To me it is the month of atonement. Coinciding with the time when the abrahamic faith received the decree Musa revealing the second tablet. The month of Ashura.
The only valid question in this discussion seems to me do you believe in the abrogation of the fasting in the month of Ashura? I personally don't.
To me Gods infinite wisdom is showing in the verses describing the fasting God knows those turning back on their heels will start meddling with any calendar system they can lay their hands on, and thus does not specify the month by any name used in any calendar system known at that time but by description.
Fasting abrogated? Qibla abrogated? Salaat abrogated? Zakaat abrogated? What else? There is very little left to abrogate.
Peace
-
Crosschecking the occurrences of qablikum http//corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=qbl#(218312), one will notice this is most of the time used to refer to those before Muhammad who were given the Scripture.
So, no in my opinion this is not ALL those before us, it refers to those to whom "saum" was decreed. These are the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Ishmael etc.
So the rest of the world are free not to fast???
Eg see http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=5&verse=5#(551)
"those who were given the Book before you"
alladhna t l-kitba min qablikum
5.5
This day are (all) things good and pure made lawful unto you. The food of the People of the Book is lawful unto you..........So everybody else's food is haram for you???
I think it's obvious this excludes people in china, japan, canada, the jungles etc. At least as far as I'm aware there were no Jews there in that time.
Peace
So Allah doesn't care about those people- no need to fast??? to get all that blessing???
peace
-
So the rest of the world are free not to fast???
God guides whoever God chooses to guide and is most Merciful. Though one should consider Quran and older scripture is available to the majority of cultures.
5.5
This day are (all) things good and pure made lawful unto you. The food of the People of the Book is lawful unto you..........So everybody else's food is haram for you???
What I understand from that verse is that they share the same principles on halal food which is true still today (if you ignore some of the Rabbinic traditions).
So Allah doesn't care about those people- no need to fast??? to get all that blessing???
See my first answer.
Peace
-
God guides whoever God chooses to guide and is most Merciful. Though one should consider Quran and older scripture is available to the majority of cultures.
What I understand from that verse is that they share the same principles on halal food which is true still today (if you ignore some of the Rabbinic traditions).
See my first answer.
Peace
So you think not the same message to all the communities?
"We have sent a messenger to every community, saying, "You shall worship God, and avoid idolatry" 1636
"We did not send any messenger before you except with the inspiration "There is no god except Me; you shall serve me alone" 2125
peace
-
So you think not the same message to all the communities?
"We have sent a messenger to every community, saying, "You shall worship God, and avoid idolatry" 1636
"We did not send any messenger before you except with the inspiration "There is no god except Me; you shall serve me alone" 2125
peace
Quran makes a distinction in what it calls 'umma'. What is your understanding? Mine is tribes. Depending on context the tribes of the descendants of Abraham, Jacob, Ishmael, Musa, etc - in other instances the tribe of followers of the messenger.
Peace
-
You can find an example of distinction in Jewish/christian ummah here
http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=5&verse=66#(5661)
and here
http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=7&verse=160#(71601)
ith'natay ashrata asban umaman
Quran says an ummah is capable to invent things about God which do not come from God. This excludes the identification of ummah as a community that has never heared about God. I find only example of ummah being either the tribes of the descendants or the tribe of Muhammad, who is to set a better example and be a witness over the existing tribes.
Peace
-
You can find an example of distinction in Jewish/christian ummah here
http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=5&verse=66#(5661)
and here
http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=7&verse=160#(71601)
ith'natay ashrata asban umaman
Quran says an ummah is capable to invent things about God which do not come from God. This excludes the identification of ummah as a community that has never heared about God. I find only example of ummah being either the tribes of the descendants or the tribe of Muhammad, who is to set a better example and be a witness over the existing tribes.
Peace
2213
Mankind was one single nation/ Ummatan, and Allah sent Messengers with glad tidings and warnings; and with them He sent the Book in truth, to judge between people in matters wherein they differed; but the People of the Book, after the clear Signs came to them, did not differ among themselves, except through selfish contumacy. Allah by His Grace Guided the believers to the Truth, concerning that wherein they differed. For Allah guided whom He will to a path that is straight.Messenger go to every nation , and give Allah's message in their own languages - but will be a very similar message with the same basic guidelines.
I think.
-
Peace 357,
Messenger go to every nation , and give Allah's message in their own languages - but will be a very similar message with the same basic guidelines.
I think.
Agreed. My extensive research and study of the real world evidence has led me to the same conclucion.
What I have found is that the basic fundamental message given to every nation in the entire universe (!) is the following
- Oneness of the Infinite Creator (the law of one).
- The law of free will.
- Importance of service to others (STO). AKA good deeds.
- Concept of an afterlife and spiritual/mental/physical progression.
Please ponder on this and you will find that from these basic principles you can derive what to do and how to spend your life in every possible scenario and situation, without needing any additional guidance.
Al-Quran expounds these basic principles in more detail and presents a practical system on how to apply these principles in our lives. The practical systems given to other nations might have some difference in the finer points but they are based on the same fundamental principles. For example in the grand scheme of things, sawm is not ESSENTIAL to attain the higher spiritual/mental/physical state in the next existence. Even in the quraanic system, it is only for mumineen.
2183 O you who believe/"alladhee aamanoo", fasting has been decreed for you as it was decreed for those before you, perhaps you may be righteous.
262 Surely those who believe; and those who are jewish, and the nazarenes, and the sabians, whoever of them believes in the god and the last day and does good works; they will have their recompense with their lord, and there is no fear upon them, nor will they grieve.
Peace and best regards.
-
I think you are making a mistake interpreting ummah as nations/communities not associated with the tribes of the descendants.
You can easily check if this is true. What messenger was sent to eg cannibals in papua new-guinee? Another example would be tribes in the Amazon that never heared about the abrahamic faith whatsoever.
Peace
