Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Users
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Free Minds Forum Icon
  1. Home
  2. General Issues / Questions
  3. Questions/Comments on the Quran
  4. Honestly, who is depicted here?

Honestly, who is depicted here?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Questions/Comments on the Quran
10 Posts 4 Posters 97 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • B Offline
    B Offline
    bkanwar2
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Dear All, please reflect and then decide whose condition is depicted here.

    Regards,

    1071

    Have you reflected about one who habitually gives untrue account whether intentionally or unintentionally regarding the state of ?submission? and ?obedience??

    1072

    As a consequence of this action such individual is driven into the isolation.

    173

    Hence, one doesn?t initiate an action against the methods of sustenance for perpetual oppression and humiliation.

    1074

    Therefore, great sorrow is for such deluded individuals.

    1075

    Those are neglectful and heedless about that which is conspicuous for them.

    1076

    Whereas, those of them who keep reflecting about it.

    1077

    Therefore they keep guarding with the great attentiveness.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • T Offline
      T Offline
      Timotheus
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      I don't know but I would be worried about your translation which seems to distort and add allot to the original Arabic

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • B Offline
        B Offline
        bkanwar2
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        I don't know but I would be worried about your translation which seems to distort and add allot to the original Arabic

        If you know anything about Arabic, please look at following and share where do you a problem leading to your conclusion.

        Regards,

        1071
        Have you reflected about one who habitually gives untrue account whether intentionally or unintentionally regarding the state of ?submission? and ?obedience??

        Syntactical Explanation

        This is an interrogative verbal sentence with a relative sentence/clause.

        Grammatical/Lexical Explanation

        The red is letter of interrogation, it followed by in black verb and in green is suffixed second person pronoun. This whole is a verbal sentence. Its meanings ?Have you reflected?. The verb root is Ra-Alif-Ya, its meanings ?he saw, considered or reflected?.

        This is a conjunctive noun and used here substantively. It is relative sentence?s/clause?s subject or . Its meanings ?he who?

        This is a third person imperfect verb (second form) in nominative case. It is predicate or of the relative sentence. The verb root is ?Ka-Thal-Ba?. It means ?he told untrue account whether intentionally or unintentionally?. Since it is the second form which would add meanings of repeatedly or frequently to the root. Hence, habitually is added in translation.

        This is a combination of a preposition ?Ba? followed by a definite noun from root ?Dal-Ya-Noon? It is compound or phrase called . This in syntax constitute, about the predicate or . The root meanings ?he became lowly or submissive or obedient?.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • Z Offline
          Z Offline
          Zulf
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          In my meager understanding, it seems to me that it may be talking about anyone who is over-confident about the nature of creation/existence. Such people have made up their minds and then go on to preach the "final truth". Such people could be anything from convinced atheists to convinced religious people. People who are not ready to admit fault in their world view. People without intellectual humbleness. Mental rigidity. Full of resistance.

          Of course, I could be totally wrong, but this was my spontaneous impression from reading (and trying to understand) the rendering given.

          Peace

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • B Offline
            B Offline
            bkanwar2
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            In my meager understanding, it seems to me that it may be talking about anyone who is over-confident about the nature of creation/existence. Such people have made up their minds and then go on to preach the "final truth". Such people could be anything from convinced atheists to convinced religious people. People who are not ready to admit fault in their world view. People without intellectual humbleness. Mental rigidity. Full of resistance.

            Of course, I could be totally wrong, but this was my spontaneous impression from reading (and trying to understand) the rendering given.

            Peace

            Thanks Zulf, if I may dare asking where majority of such people belong in current times?

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • Z Offline
              Z Offline
              Zulf
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              I'd say they belong everywhere, but especially in groups with a fixed point of view, i.e. religions, sects. Of course it is not limited to just religions, but religions are after all champions of suppressing and discouraging critical thinking, change and anything that is not conforming. Also important in this case is that it is part of the mission of religious groupings to spread their dogma. Not only do they claim it to be the ultimate truth, but they also make a huge point of spreading it, to gain market share.

              The missionary work of religions is therefore just like the spreading of rumors. Nobody seriously considers evaluating the dogma, but everyone is utterly keen to passing it on.

              The funny thing is that while it seems that religious people are living in some impression that their religion is fixed and unchanging truth (since truth doesn't change) they at the same time fail to see how much the worldview, concepts and practices have changed within their religion of decades and centuries. Perhaps their books are unchanged, but the values and behavior of the religious people have indeed changed a lot. Perhaps religion isn't such a fixed thing afterall. This forces us to ask Wherein lies the truth in religion? Is there a core of truth while the other things can be altered as per desire? Why then is it forbidden to change anything in religions? Why do religious people claim to possess the truth, while it at the same time changes over time? As usual, in the case of religion, something doesn't add up.

              Of course, the problem is not religion itself, but rather the disposition and nature of the human being. When we fall pray to our mind and the trance inducing physical world we live in, we lose the power to discern what we are and what reality is. And since we have no sense of our real self, we pick up pieces from here and there to construct a self. Religion becomes a large part of people's identity, and for this very reason, it is impossible to critically evaluate these upheld beliefs, simply because they are such an integral part of the individuals identity, and it would be conceptual suicide to question your won identity. Emotions will effectively ward off any attempts at questioning. Enter wars and conflicts in the name of religion/culture/nations/ethnicity.

              Having lost touch with our real selves (and hence reality), the result is that we walk blind in darkness, just guessing, relying on and spreading conjecture, to sooth an indescribable and impalpable inner black hole. It's a itching fear arising from being (apparently) disconnected and isolated in existence that makes us do what we do.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • M Offline
                M Offline
                mmmm
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                Dear All, please reflect and then decide whose condition is depicted here.

                Regards,

                1071

                Have you reflected about one who habitually gives untrue account whether intentionally or unintentionally regarding the state of ?submission? and ?obedience??

                1072

                As a consequence of this action such individual is driven into the isolation.

                173

                Hence, one doesn?t initiate an action against the methods of sustenance for perpetual oppression and humiliation.

                1074

                Therefore, great sorrow is for such deluded individuals.

                1075

                Those are neglectful and heedless about that which is conspicuous for them.

                1076

                Whereas, those of them who keep reflecting about it.

                1077

                Therefore they keep guarding with the great attentiveness.

                Are you Ahle Aqal?
                Selam.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • B Offline
                  B Offline
                  bkanwar2
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  Are you Ahle Aqal?
                  Selam.

                  Please elaborate further what do you mean? Thanks

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • M Offline
                    M Offline
                    mmmm
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    I mean this ahleaqal.blogspot.com?

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • B Offline
                      B Offline
                      bkanwar2
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #10

                      I mean this ahleaqal.blogspot.com?

                      No nothing to do with that website. However, here is an aid for any Ahleaqal's Aqal. In case they want to use it to over bewilderment of "how come"?

                      1071
                      Have you reflected about one who habitually gives untrue account whether intentionally or unintentionally regarding the state of ?submission? and ?obedience??

                      Syntactical Explanation

                      This is an interrogative verbal sentence with a relative sentence/clause.

                      Grammatical/Lexical Explanation

                      The red is letter of interrogation, it followed by in black verb and in green is suffixed second person pronoun. This as a whole is a verbal sentence. Its meanings ?Have you reflected?. The verb root is Ra-Alif-Ya, its meanings ?he saw, considered or reflected?.
                      This is a conjunctive/relative noun and used here substantively. It is relative sentence?s/clause?s subject or . Its meanings ?he who?

                      This is a third person imperfect verb (second form) in nominative case. It is predicate or of the relative sentence. The verb root is ?Ka-Thal-Ba?. It means ?he told untrue account whether intentionally or unintentionally?. Since it is the second form which would add meanings of repeatedly or frequently to the root. Hence, habitually is added in translation.

                      This is a combination of a preposition ?Ba? followed by a definite noun from root ?Dal-Ya-Noon? It is compound or phrase called . This in syntax constitute, about the predicate or . The root meanings ?he became lowly or submissive or obedient?.

                      1072

                      As a consequence of this action such an individual is driven into the isolation.
                      Syntactical Explanation

                      This is a copulative nominal sentence.

                      Grammatical/Lexical Explanation

                      The beginning is with copulative particle ?Fa?. This is followed by a demonstrative noun meaning ?this? which is the subject or of the sentence. The copulative particle ?Fa? usually connects two clauses, showing that the latter is immediately subsequent to the former in time, or that it is connected with it by some internal link, such as that of cause and effect. It may be rendered as ?consequently?. However, this demonstrative noun ?this? can only make sense, if bring forward the concept that ?fa? is connecting ?this? with. Hence, translation of ?As a consequence of this? This what? The action clause before. The action of submission and obedience. Therefore, meanings of ?as consequence of this preceding action?.

                      This is a relative clause or sentence. It as a whole constitute as the predicate or of the nominal sentence. However, it has its own part being clause or sentence. is a conjunctive noun used substantively as subject or as of relative sentence. It is connecting/relating some concept from previous verse. Hence, it is translated as ?such an individual?.

                      This an imperfect verb in indicative case. It is predicate or of the relative sentence. It is root is ?Dal-Ayn-Ayn? meanings ?he pushed or repelled or drove?. Finally is which is definite noun. This in syntax constitute, about the predicate or of relative sentence. The root is ?Ya-Ta-Miim?, its root meanings, ?he became isolated or solitude?.

                      173

                      So, one doesn?t rise with passion against the subsistence of perpetual oppression and humiliation.

                      Syntactical Explanation

                      This is a copulative and negative sentence.

                      Grammatical/Lexical Explanation

                      ?Waw? is a copulative particle. It is followed by a negative particle ?La?. ?waw? is translated as ?so? and ?La? as does not.

                      This is an imperfect third person singular verb in indicative case. Its root is ?Ha-Dad-Dad?. Its meaning is ?he instigated or rouse with ardor?. It has third person pronoun built in it as subject or agent of the sentence or .

                      It is particle with several meanings, due context ?against? is used. It is

                      It is a phrase or .. It is combination of two nouns, first is from root ?Tay-Ayn-Miim?. It is an adjective at the measure of . Its root has several meanings, however due context ?subsistence? as used. The second noun is definite noun from root ?Siin=Kaf-Nun?. It is at measure of which is adjective meaning doing something like machine, mechanically or habitually. The root meaning ?lowliness, humiliation, oppression or poverty of mind. The meanings of perpetual is added from measure?s meaning. This is syntactically called ?about subject or verb/action? or

                      1074

                      Therefore, great sorrow is for such deluded individuals.

                      Syntactic Explanation

                      This again a copulative sentence.

                      Grammatical/Lexical Explanation

                      The beginning is with copulative particle ?Fa? explained above. It followed by interjection meaning ?Alas, Woe or great sorrow?.

                      There are three words in this apparently one word. At start, is a preposition with several meanings due context, ?for? is selected. It makes a phrase or compound as . It is followed by definite article ?Al?, although if preposition ?Lee? is prefixed the ?Alif? of ?Al? is dropped in spelling. This followed by an adjective from root ?Sad-Lam-Ya? verb form II. It is plural and in genitive case due preposition ?Lee?. Its root meaning is ?he deluded or deceived?

                      1075

                      These are neglectful and heedless about that which is conspicuous for them.

                      Syntactical Explanation

                      This is relative clause or sentence.

                      Grammatical/Lexical Explanation

                      This is relative noun plural used substantively. It is also subject or of relative sentence. Since it relates to antecedent which is in the previous verse and is definite noun i.e., . The predicate or of this relative sentence is . This is active participle in nominative case from root ?Siin-ha-Waw?. It?s root meanings is ?he was neglectful or heedless?.

                      This is third person plural noun. It is used as used ?separator? . It separates the from another relative clause .

                      It is a phrase or compound called as . This is a preposition with several meanings but due context ?about? is used in translation above. It is called in grammatical terms as . Whereas, is itself a phrase called . It has two parts. First is genitive noun from root ?Sad-Lam-Ta? followed by third person plural noun. The root ?Sad-Lam-Ta? means ?it was conspicuous or clear?. Together these two words form a as well of the . Since it is separated from antecedent and the antecedent is indefinite. The rule of language dictates that there will be no copulative or relative noun. However, when translated into English it will need one. Hence, words ?that which? are used in translation above.

                      1076

                      These are the ones who keep reflecting.

                      Syntactic Explanation

                      This again a relative nominal sentence.

                      Grammatical/Lexical Explanation

                      Same explanation as previous verse. It as copulative or relative noun and is referring to ?ones to whom it is conspicuous? in the previous verse.

                      It is third person plural noun. It is used here for emphasis and hence word ?the? is used in translation.

                      It is imperfect third person plural verb (form III). Its root ?Ra-Alif-Ya?. Its meanings ?he saw, considered or reflected?. It syntactically the predicate or of the sentence.

                      1077

                      Therefore they keep guarding with the great attentiveness.

                      Syntactical Explanation

                      Since it has copulative particle at the start, practically it is part of previous verse.

                      Grammatical/Lexical Explanation

                      The copulative particle at the start ?Waw?, translated as ?therefore?. It is followed by a third person plural imperfect verb from root ?Miim-Nun-Ayn?. Its meanings ?he remained prevented or guarded?. This is followed by a definite noun from root ?Miim-Ayn-Nun?. Its root meaning ?attentiveness?.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Don't have an account? Register

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Users