QUESTION FOR THOSE WHO USE THE TRANSLATIONS
-
Peace KB,
You stated,
I would want to verify what is being said by going to the actual word of god
.How do you verify the actual word of God? Please explain this process to me so that I may understand. I've explained my process, kindly return the favor.
Peace,
Tay -
Salaamun alaikum kgb,
Look at Layth. He is Saudi with perfect Arabic still he has trouble understanding the message. He is not sure about anything now. Why the person with command on Arabic is unable to understand the message? According to Qur'an, he do not have the "faith" and Allah (SWT) is putting screens before his eyes, deafness in his ears.
I know you all guys hate me for saying all this but sorry this is my honest analysis.
Hate you ? I doubt even Layth hates you. I may not agree with him on some issues, but Layth is a fair person. He wont hate a person for disagreeing.
-
Salaamun alaikum,
mquran wrote
Some other ingredients are needed before the word is inspired on you, I think.
Would be interested to hear your views on this.Well basically, it all goes back to the concept of 'inzaal' or descent/revelation. I believe that all humans have the potential to recieve revelation from God. Once you do, that is SURE knowledge. That's why you cant call a peaceful person a 'non-believer', because no 2 ppl share the same experience.
This is the point, right here... we can concern ourselves with a bunch of dots, letters or even numbers... in the end it means nothing. Put your trust in HIM, and ask HIM for help and guidance, it's the only way.
Without the GOD's guidance we have nothing.
Well, this is the dilemma I have, Zenje. Im trying to put together a Quranic education program and what happened is that I put too much emphasis on the 2-dimensional, academic aspect. Now I realise that experentalism is the name of the game. Even the Quran teaches us via the experience of people before, by activating the same linguistic triggers as they did.
thanks and peace.
-
the source is the quran, the orginal word of god, all I meant was to be sure a verse is translated correctly it would make sence to study god's words , take this verse for example "Forbidden unto you are carrion and blood and swine-flesh.... (Al Ma' idah 3). tell me what is your way of verifying that verse is translated correctly if it's not going to the arabic quran?
Peace KB,
Just come across this post of yours today and I happen to be right in an online discussion with a guy that's studying tafsir and hadits in Egypt. He comes up with a hadits which he claimed to have 'clarified' that verse.
The hadits goes like 'Carrion is forbidden except the carrion of whale and locusts, and blood is forbidden except the liver and gizzard' (There is another version of this hadits which said fish and locusts, and liver and spleen, as those not forbidden). I've been trying to convince him that the verse is clear and detailed enough so we could follow what is prescribed there directly, and we have no need of this hadits.
I also pointed out that the content of this hadits is strange on the 'not forbidden blood' part, because we know the liver and spleen/gizzard/whatever internal organ referred IS NOT blood! I get the impression that he thought the 'blood' referred in the al-Maidah verse should cover internal organs as well, and I checked the word translated as 'blood' in the Arabic text. It is 'al-dam'. Did a quick search and discovered that 'al-dam' always refer to 'the blood' (for example, in Yusuf's tale where his brothers stained his shirt with blood), the red oxygen-carrying liquid that flows in the bodies of animals and people, and not to organs.
I showed the results to the community. One other guy agrees with me and tried to reason that maybe the hadits was meant for people of the Messenger's time which were supposed to not know the difference between blood and liver(?). Another one warned me that I've gone too far and rejected the sunna etc etc. But I'm still waiting for the reply from that tafsir scholar.
-
Peace KGB,
I have no problem with objective analysis, nor do I have a problem with constructive criticism, nor do I have a problem with a friendly reminder. But what you said was neither of the above.
You said,
According to Qur'an, he do not have the "faith" and Allah (SWT) is putting screens before his eyes, deafness in his ears.
Why, because you feel he's trying to prove the Qur'an is fallible? Is this the new criteria?
The truth withstands all atempts to undermine it, because the truth is absolute. So even if Layth was trying to undermine the credibility of the Qur'an, which I highly doubt, then the validity of the Qur'an should stand on it's own legs, and would in fact strengthen the faith of a believer.
Remember, we're told to verify all information, and verification begins with questions.But more importantly, you have casted judgement on a person based on your assumptions of what that person's intentions are, and somehow you twisted this idea of yours as something that's supported by the Qur'an. You did not establish your case in the least, yet were quick to judgement, calling it your objective analysis.
I find this irresponsible and cheap. I sincerely hope you will prove me wrong and support your claims, as I do not enjoy feeling this way about someone, even someone I've never met in person.
May peace be upon you,
Tay