Is fluency is spoken & written Arabic necessary ...
-
Arabic dictionary is indeed a dangerous combination to study al-qur'aan.
I agree with this statement. The clear verses of Qur'an translated into something else by using the dictionary root defination without the knowledge of Arabic language and Arabic grammer.
Similarly this is also true in the case of those studying the Qur'aan having Arabic as a second language when the dictionary can often be a hindrance than a help.
-
Arabic dictionary is indeed a dangerous combination to study al-qur'aan.
I agree with this statement. The clear verses of Qur'an translated into something else by using the dictionary root defination without the knowledge of Arabic language and Arabic grammer.
I've seen that approach used here by the christian Apple Pie, on his twisted crusade to 'prove' that the Qur'an says that Jesus is God. I remember asking him whether he considered Lane's Lexikon to be God's word, given that he picks meanings that support his thesis from Lane confused
-
Salaamun alaikum brother mquran, all,
Classical Arabic helped only half of the way, the rest depended upon the Quran's internal structure.
That is exactly what I was saying
The correct approach would be to learn CLASSICAL Arabic language + use reputable CLASSICAL Arabic dictionaries (more than one) + study the qur'aanic context of the revelations + determine the meaning of a word in al-qur'aan according to what al-qur'aan defines as its meaning + study all occurrences of the same words or themes in al-qur'aan + compare at least 10 different translations + use our mind, reason, and knowledge + discuss with people of knowledge + follow the best meaning.
The part of my quote above in blue = al-qur'aan's internal structure.
Al-quraan's vocabulary was subverted by a religious subversion. Deen, taqwa, islam, salaat have all a quranically-explained meaning yet this meaning has been changed by likes the hadith and sunnah. Most translations are unacceptable to me as they use these hadithic meanings.
Agreed. That is the same as I mentioned in my post
Majority of the translators rely heavily on the unverifiable and fabricated hearsays and rumors falsely attributed to Prophet Muhammad for translation of al-qur'aan and also rely on the post qur'aanic modern Arabic meanings of the qur'aanic words and their personal desires and egos, thereby completely distorting the original message and causing utter chaos and confusion. That is why no single translator can be blindly/completely/fully trusted to determine the true meaning of Allah's words.
The red part in my quote above = so called "hadith and sunnah" and the blue part = modern Arabic dictionaries.
I disagree to 'dangerous' because the vocabulary of al-quraan doesn't include 'modern' words like telephone etc.
I agree that the vocabulary of al-quraan doesn't include 'modern' words like telephone etc. and that is not the reason I said that modern Arabic dictionaries are dangerous to understand al-qur'aan.
I said it was dangerous because of two reasons
Firstly, modern Arabic dictionaries have given alternative post-qur'aanic meanings to some qur'aanic words which are not the original true meanings of those words in the context of their qur'aanic usage, which can cause confusion and misunderstanding and mistranslation if those qur'aanic words are translated according to modern Arabic dictionaries.
Secondly, the correct approach to understanding al-qur'aan is not Arabic as second language + modern Arabic dictionary, but is learning CLASSICAL Arabic language + al-qur'aan's internal structure + using our minds, reason, knowledge as I stated in my previous post.
I agree when you questioned the usage of social or historical context to determine the meaning of any verse. Firstly, all the social/historical/political context necessary to understand any qur'aanic verse is already given in al-qur'aan itself. Secondly, the "social/historical/political context" based on the unverifiable and fabricated hearsays and rumors falsely attributed to Prophet Muhammad (so called hadith and sunnah) is totally unreliable and therefore cannot and should not be used to determine the true meanings of Allah's words.
In my understanding NONE of the qur'aanic verses need any social/historical/political context for their proper understanding OTHER THAN the social/historical/political context already mentioned in al-qur'aan, which makes the unreliable/unverifiable/fabricated social/historical/political context based on the so called hadith and sunnah redundant anyway.
-
Arabic dictionary is indeed a dangerous combination to study al-qur'aan.
I agree with this statement. The clear verses of Qur'an translated into something else by using the dictionary root defination without the knowledge of Arabic language and Arabic grammer.
Similarly this is also true in the case of those studying the Qur'aan having Arabic as a second language when the dictionary can often be a hindrance than a help.
Sister Zainab unfortunately Arabic is not even my second language. I am ashamed to admit that can't read Arabic Qur'an. Its about four years that I have made some progress to read some words but not sure how to pronounce them correctly. I have to depend on various translations to understand the message.
-
Arabic dictionary is indeed a dangerous combination to study al-qur'aan.
I agree with this statement. The clear verses of Qur'an translated into something else by using the dictionary root defination without the knowledge of Arabic language and Arabic grammer.
I've seen that approach used here by the christian Apple Pie, on his twisted crusade to 'prove' that the Qur'an says that Jesus is God. I remember asking him whether he considered Lane's Lexikon to be God's word, given that he picks meanings that support his thesis from Lane confused
This is exactly what I am talking about you understand it very correctly.
-
to acquire intellectual recognition in the Islamic world ??
It is soooooo hard zainab to get that - It seems that only you can recognise my genius!
But I guess that is good enough DThe more I get to know our people, the more confused I get. I don't know what's happening to our Ummah. Makes one so despondent.
Perhaps you can join my "Ummah" zainab?
This Ummah is called "Humanity" - and there is plenty of room for you DRegards,
"Humanity" has different communities which evolves out of a natural and harmless phenomenon in humans. And one of these communities has been the Muslim Ummah since the 7th century. It might not exist any longer because of the shenanigans of its own people, but it once did exist, and it's always suppose to. There's no need to get paranoid at the sound of the word 'Ummah.' It's got nothing to do with dividing humanity, if that's what some are thinking. There's nothing wrong with forming one's own community, and neither does this mean being reclusive or not liking the others. I would never have such a negative approach!
-
Salaams and peace dear Leyla ..
Many thanks for your informative posts. I found them very helpful. -
Zainab"Humanity" has different communities which evolves out of a natural and harmless phenomenon in humans. And one of these communities has been the Muslim Ummah since the 7th century. It might not exist any longer because of the shenanigans of its own people, but it once did exist, and it's always suppose to. There's no need to get paranoid at the sound of the word 'Ummah.' It's got nothing to do with dividing humanity, if that's what some are thinking. There's nothing wrong with forming one's own community, and neither does this mean being reclusive or not liking the others. I would never have such a negative approach!
That's right, a Muslim ummah is supposed to exist, it's meant to be central/main ummah (ummatan wasat - 2/143) although I would say people calling themselves 'muslim' today do not have such an ummah. Humankind is meant to be one ummah too (ummatan wahid - 2/213).
-
That's right, a Muslim ummah is supposed to exist, it's meant to be central/main ummah (ummatan wasat - 2/143) although I would say people calling themselves 'muslim' today do not have such an ummah.
Yes, right ...
Humankind is meant to be one ummah too (ummatan wahid - 2/213).
Right on again .. however, as I had talked briefly on this topic earlier, differences are inherent of human temperament. There are lots of values that the universal human community ought to acquire, but they don't. Thus, from the practical view point, we need to see matters the way they are, rather than the way they should be. Allah SWT mentions in the Glorious Qur'aan that if He so wanted He could have made all mankind one community. But He wants to put us through tests & trials in this earthly world, so He has created us the way we are. Besides, as I already stated, creating a Muslim Ummah must not be taken as a gesture for dividing the world community. In fact, Muslims are not the only ones who are supposed to have an Ummah. Such community cultures exist in every society. What's important is to have the right goal of smooth interaction, understanding and harmony between these various sections of people in our planet.
Peace ..
-
ZainabRight on again .. however, as I had talked briefly on this topic earlier, differences are inherent of human temperament. There are lots of values that the universal human community ought to acquire, but they don't. Thus, from the practical view point, we need to see matters the way they are, rather than the way they should be.
I'm afraid I have a problem with that because what you phrased as 'the way they are' (are - to be, existing) isn't real. It's based on a baathil system, a system that would crumble in the coming of al-haqq (21/18, al-haqq smashes the brains of al-baathil).
Having said that, al-quraan isn't a binary reality in the sense that it's either a 0 value (no quranic values) or 1 (100% quranic values). There are various stages along The Way.
Allah SWT mentions in the Glorious Qur'aan that if He so wanted He could have made all mankind one community. But He wants to put us through tests & trials in this earthly world, so He has created us the way we are.
I disagree. While 'insaaniyat' (where 'ins' is a word described in the Quraan in mostly negative terms) is an aspect of an-naas (humankind), there's also the 'bashariyat' (where 'bashar' is the aspect of the Adamic man, who knows of his position in the world). So both states, the fall and the awakening are possible. Presently however, the world is in the fall.
Besides, as I already stated, creating a Muslim Ummah must not be taken as a gesture for dividing the world community. In fact, Muslims are not the only ones who are supposed to have an Ummah. Such community cultures exist in every society. What's important is to have the right goal of smooth interaction, understanding and harmony between these various sections of people in our planet.
Not division but direction. I say a 'muslim ummah' should lead the world in actualising the human being and spreading God's light in the world.
-
ZainabRight on again .. however, as I had talked briefly on this topic earlier, differences are inherent of human temperament. There are lots of values that the universal human community ought to acquire, but they don't. Thus, from the practical view point, we need to see matters the way they are, rather than the way they should be.
I'm afraid I have a problem with that because what you phrased as 'the way they are' (are - to be, existing) isn't real. It's based on a baathil system, a system that would crumble in the coming of al-haqq (21/18, al-haqq smashes the brains of al-baathil).
Having said that, al-quraan isn't a binary reality in the sense that it's either a 0 value (no quranic values) or 1 (100% quranic values). There are various stages along The Way.
Allah SWT mentions in the Glorious Qur'aan that if He so wanted He could have made all mankind one community. But He wants to put us through tests & trials in this earthly world, so He has created us the way we are.
I disagree. While 'insaaniyat' (where 'ins' is a word described in the Quraan in mostly negative terms) is an aspect of an-naas (humankind), there's also the 'bashariyat' (where 'bashar' is the aspect of the Adamic man, who knows of his position in the world). So both states, the fall and the awakening are possible. Presently however, the world is in the fall.
Besides, as I already stated, creating a Muslim Ummah must not be taken as a gesture for dividing the world community. In fact, Muslims are not the only ones who are supposed to have an Ummah. Such community cultures exist in every society. What's important is to have the right goal of smooth interaction, understanding and harmony between these various sections of people in our planet.
Not division but direction. I say a 'muslim ummah' should lead the world in actualising the human being and spreading God's light in the world.
Salaams and Peace ..
It's really very simple and I wish to keep it that way. Without going into the intricacies of words, my meaning was only that differences of opinions and thoughts are natural among humans, and there's just no denying about that. However, that by itself is not frightening. What's important is how we handle these differences. Allah SWT has clearly mentioned in the Qur'aan that He has created mankind with this characteristic. Thus obviously, we have the ability to choose our path of conduct on the basis of which He judges us. Unfortunately I don't have the time now to look for that verse. But InshAllah I will put it as soon as I find it. And yes, a Muslim Ummah should lead the world and keep spreading the word of Allah. I never said that it shouldn't. In fact I clearly referred to the Muslim "Ummah" while LT and you referred to Ummah of humanity. My point was to clarify this issue. I wasn't referring to a division either, but LT's apparent sarcasm over the word "Ummah" and your agreement with him puzzled me because such an idea usually comes from a mindset when people pre-suppose that forming an Ummah means being reclusive or parochial. All I wanted to say was that that's not so. If by mentioning ummah of humanity, you meant that the Muslim Ummah should be leading the way, perhaps you should have clarified that as you did it now and then I would have understood it more correctly.