questions on muhammad, sufism, etc.
-
It seems to me that the la only means ?indeed?, or ?surely?.
See http//www.free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=6003.msg92621#msg92621Please bro, I hate jumping from a thread to another, you can put it briefly in here if you want me to read it, however I ask you how you justify that the letter L means Indeed?
The linked page is on the same thread.
I?m not saying it does not mean that, but it seems you are following a context to understand the meaning, but a native Arab speaker will surely have an edge on you in understanding the context of the Arabic language
And surely
But
And
Any of the above will not change the context meaning that Zikr Allah is akbar than Salat in motivating us to stay away from Fahshaa and Munkar
We cannot say that ?Zikr Allah is akbar than Salat? because there is not ?than salat? in the verse.
This is pure conjecture.The sentence Zikr Allah Akbar is missing logic if you assume that akbar is a comparative, but not if you consider it to be a superlative.
So what do you think is the ;possibility would you take it as 50 50 that it is comparative superlative?
If you do then fine therefore, it is either me is wrong or you are wrong, and this sounds fair to me
I suggest we go deeper in the issue before eventually agreeing to disagree.
What is exactly your opinion?- akbar in is for sure a comparative
or - akbar in can be either a comparative or a superlative ?
Why is there an exception only when we are talking about Allah ?
Did you find it in a grammar book ?Yes I did and that back then when I was a child this is how we were taught at Arabic schools, don?t forget that the Quran tuned the Arabic language and the arabs learnt a lot of things from it regarding the language
In what I have read, it is said that the elative can be either a superlative or a comparative, be it about Allah or not.
What is the compared term in Qul ayyu shay-in akbaru shahadatan (from )?
Oh come, on an Arabic child will recognise that, the compared entity is two, the Shahada of Allah and the Shahada of humans, and surely the Shahada of Allah is Akbar than the Shahada of humans
In that case, why do you not say about that the dhikr of Allah is better than any other dhikr (rather that better than salat) ?
Is not akbar a superlative in this sentence ?
I don?t see it this way because Shahada came after Akbar, as well Akbar does not have the Al
I don?t understand what difference it makes that the shahada comes after akbar.
Anyway, you have just said that is was a comparative with the implied term of comparison ?the Shahada of humans?, and a comparative with no term of comparison (or an implied one) is nothing but a superlative.In this sentence, there is al before akram, so, akram, is clearly a superlative.
I agree that this one is superlative because it has the Al, so let me ask you why you want Akbar to be superlative and it does not have the Al?
Therefore, it is not a good example.
Of course it is, I was using your logic in being mixed up with the word switout the Al and with the Al
Sometimes you suggest that Akbar is superlative while it does not have the Al, the you say about Akram that it is superlative because it has the Al, mate I?m sure there are some sort of confusion in here, if it was on my side then it is caused by you, LOL
With the al, it is always the superlative.
Without it, it can be either a comparative or a superlative.
If there is a term of comparison (min + sthg), it is a comparative; and if there is no comparison term, it is a superlative.Could you bring a justification for your rule (1) ?when we talk about Allah,
Excuse me bro, this is a matter of respect like Allah referring to Himself as We sometimes and many other things that violates the human grammar, however the believers took it as Allah is teaching us the proper grammar
the second compared entity in a comparison may be dropped? ? Why would it be only possible when we talk about Allah ?
as a matter of respect, and possibly IT HAS to be dropped with some comparative words like ?Akbar? because it will sound odd to say Allah is Akbar than something
therefore Allah Akbar should be translated as Allah is greater
if you translate it as Allah is the greatest then you clearly forged the translation because the Al does not exist,
you need to justify your addition to the non existence Al before I continue this issue with you
In English, a sentence like ?Allah is greater? is meaningless (even if sentences of that kind are sometimes used by the advertisers)... A comparative should be followed by ?than?.
So, Allahakbar can only be translated by ?Allah is the greatest?.How would you translate hadihi aqdam-u ?l-mudum-i fi-l-alam-i ?
Clearly the word Mudun came after aqdam, hence we have the entities to compare and because the Al is in Al Mudun then we don?t need it in the word aqdam, and both words ?aqdam Al Mudun? will be tight together as ?Muddaf and Muddaf Ilih? therefore it has to be translated as oldest of The cities
Again you have no point
There is a al before mudun, so, aqdam is a superlative ??? What is this grammar rule according to which the al has not to be placed before an elative to make it a superlative ?
And what are the 2 compared entities?
Could you tell me what is your grammar book?If you don?t know, you can find the response in this thesis below, page 123.
http//user.uni-frankfurt.de/~kremers/papers/thesis.pdfPeace
I did translate it and gave an Arabic grammar hint
Now I ask you please to bring your points if you wish in here, I don?t jump between threads when I?m discussing something with anyone
This is my last comment to you regarding this subject of Akbar
Salam
A last question How would you translate waridwanun mina Allahiakbaru (from ) ?
Peace
- akbar in is for sure a comparative
-
Peace JM
man, i stated that my last comment was the last regarding the subject of Akbar, i donlt really want to waste the time of both of us, however because I didn't say Inshaallah when I said it will be my last comment by ,Mistake, it seems I will have ONE MORE comment to make regarding this subject Inshaallah, but bear with me a couple of days Inshaallah as I'm flat out currently, i didn't even read your comment fully yet
Salam
-
hello and peace!
i'm completely new to this forum. so please forgive me if i stray into some well covered topics. but my curiosity must be satisfied! er...
well, yeah, anyway...
- muhammad i've read several things (unless i'm totally mistaken) in qur'an-only lit equating praying for and praising muhammad as making him equal to god. however, 33.56
God and His angels shower there blessings on the Prophet.
O believers, you should also send your blessings on him,
and salute him with a worthy greeting.(ahmed ali translation)
the progressive muslims translation
3356 God and His Angels connect with the prophet. O you who believe, you shall connect with him, and yield completely.
and, i don't find it horribly different in essence. i'b be interested in seeing a breakdown of the arabic.
regardless, this would seem to allow for praying for and praising muhammad in salat and even leave room for salawat. not as equal to god, but more allong the lines of while we're connected to god in and immediately after salat, we might as well (should?) talk about the prophet, and "connect" with him, who's revelation we employ, etc. ((this might also indicate that the traditional shahada is not invalid if including "muhammadin rasulallah" (or which ever pronounciation you prefer).))
which brings me to i've noted folks talking about not elevating muhammad above other prophets (which i agree with in essence... i have a very special place in my heart for the prophets lao-tzu, siddhartha, isa, krishna, etc.), but 33.21
You have indeed a noble paradigm
in the Apostle of Godthe p.m translation is even more interesting in this regard
3321 Indeed, in the messenger of God a good example has been set for you
so a focus on muhammad is certainly understandable for muslims. this does not necessarily mean that muhammad is superior, only that he kicks arse.
- hadith ... i am pretty sympathetic to the arguements put forth that the hadith / sunnah are generally corrupt. but i don't think the more traditional argument (based in part on what i've just quoted and similar passages) is wholly wrong, that hadtih rose out of a desire to understand the life and personality of the prophet so that later muslims could follow such passages as 33.21. so for me the question becomes less "are the hadith valid?" and more "what hadith are useful / helpful and do not contradict the qur'an?" for me its not a matter of literal historical accuracy, but a question of whether or not the hadith contains wisdom which helps me to better understand the qur'an and draw closer to allah.
thus, hadith about stoning people, out the window. while the hadith symbolically describing the prophet's "enlightenment" (for lack of a better word) experience (you know, the one with the horse and all) seems to me important for what it reveals.
- sufism ... a bit of backstory what has drawn me to islam is, quite frankly, sufism. not that the mystical tracks within islam can really be contained in one term, but its a useful shorthand... so i'm using it. ... but, yeah sufism is more or less the door thru which i am entering islam, as such. so the few comments i've read on this forum were a little disturbing to me. in that i think a lot of folks misunderstand the intent (which, no need to tell me, is often different from the reality) of the teacher / student relationship within sufism. that is since sufism is basically about techniques for understanding one's nafs, cleansing the heart, drawing closer to god in love, etc. it makes sense that one might need a teacher, in the same sense that i have a teacher for aikido, or wish to aquire one for learning arabic, etc. but like any student / teacher relationship, it can be dangerous because you are giving up a little bit of autonomy by trusting someone to help you in a correct manner. i mean my aikido teacher could be totally teaching me bogus techniques, and an arabic teacher might be teaching me to say "i'm a cornhusking fishmonger" when i think s/he is teaching me to say "all praises to allah", or some such. naturally, in a spiritually charged situation, the stakes are a bit higher, but that does not negate the possible necessity of guidence.
of course one can get totally taken by some fraud, or give in to a cult of personality masquerading as devotion to allah. but, for example, the order in which i am seeking admitance is pretty forthright about the resonsibility of the dervish to check for themselves, and test the teachings, not accepting anything without question -- as per qur'an perscription. service, then, to one's shaykh does not mean the negation of any of these things, but instead is a technique for for learning viserally how to be a servant to allah, and by extention the world. indeed, in this order, one can tell elder dervishes by the fact that they are better at serving the new dervishes than the other way around. one of the sayings in the order (because kissing the ring of the shaykh is a custom) is when one kisses the ring of a shaykh, s/he kisses your feet. that is the shaykh is there to serve the dervish, not the other way around. the reversal of this is evidence that the shaykh in question is a false sufi, and should be abandonded -- they are not practicing humility and modesty.
so, ideally, a sufi order is a place in which everyone is learning how to serve everyone, as well as learning how to cleanse one's heart, etc. in this way it should be a model for any community of muslims.
i'll call it now... any thoughts, etc. would be wonderful!
thanks!!
peace!!!
jeff.
p.s. i've always wanted to be a jedi jedi via la obi-wan kenobi!
As salamu alaykum.
Respectfully.Nowhere in the Qur'an does it say that we have to mention Muhammad's name in the prayer.
In fact, we are ordered to mention ONLY God in the prayer, because we pray ONLY to God.As salamu alaykum.
-
Without saying Allahu Akbar, Allah has been Al Kabir. Allahu Akbar means you men do not just say that Allah is Akbar but make prove that Allah is Akbar i.e. Allah has a real authority to command you in every aspect of life. That will be true if men establish Allah's kingdom in earth, if other wise, you just say a meangingless word to Allah very time.
-
Salaam JM
I notice that you have two questions
-
the meaning of the "laam" in "la'kbar"
-
Whether "akbar" means "greater" or "greatest".
-
the laam is never used to mean "but"; it is used as a preposition to mean different things, but also as emphasis (before a verb or a noun). Here it is emphasis (indeed) as you put it.
-
The (min = than) is not indespensible for the comparative. I think Ahmed gave you a good example of a comparative without (min). The difference between superlative and comparative in Arabic is that the former is definite and the latter is indefinte
Akber comparative
Alakbar Superlative.
-
-
- The (min = than) is not indespensible for the comparative. I think Ahmed gave you a good example of a comparative without (min). The difference between superlative and comparative in Arabic is that the former is definite and the latter is indefinte
Akber comparative
Alakbar Superlative.
Could you check this link http//user.uni-frankfurt.de/~kremers/papers/thesis.pdf, page 123 ?
Peace
- The (min = than) is not indespensible for the comparative. I think Ahmed gave you a good example of a comparative without (min). The difference between superlative and comparative in Arabic is that the former is definite and the latter is indefinte
-
The example given is hathihi aqdamul muduni This is the oldest among the cities.
or
hathihi aqdamu madinatin this is the oldest city"aqdamu" in both sentenses is definite by "idafa".
Is this what you mean?
You said that an elative needs a al ("the" to be a superlative.
Example akbar (without al) = "greater" (comparative) ; alakbar (with al) = "greatest" (superlative)But, in these 2 examples, aqdam is a superlative, and there is no al.
Peace
-
You said that an elative needs a al ("the" to be a superlative
No, I did not say that. I said
The difference between superlative and comparative in Arabic is that the former is definite and the latter is indefinte
al is a tool of defining a noun, but not the only tool. Idafa is another one, hence
hathihi aqdamul muduni This is the oldest among the cities.
or
hathihi aqdamu madinatin this is the oldest city"aqdamu" in both sentenses is definite by "idafa".
...and therefore no need for an extra tool (al)
-
Peace Samia,
Could you provide your source for the grammar rule you are quoting ?
Now, let me ask you the same questions as I asked to AB.
- How would you translate the popular sentence Allahakbar ?
- How would you translate waridwanun mina Allahiakbaru (from ) ?
Peace
-
- God/Allah is Greater
I don't understand this sentence. God is greater that what ? ? ?
Is it good english ?What do you think of this
Allahu Akbar is a shortened form of the Arabic phrase Allahu Akbar min kulli shay, which means "God is greater than everything."
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TakbirAnd this
Allahu Akbar is Arabic for "God is the greatest." Akbar is the elative form of the adjective kabr (great, big, important), meaning "greater, greatest, or very great." The elative combines the meanings of comparative (greater than) and superlative (most great). However, the elative is only explicitly a term of comparison when used with the preposition min, e.g. Allhu akbar min mala'ikatihi, "Allah is greater than His angels", Allhu Akbar min kulli shay "God is greater than all". Without a term of comparison, the elative conveys the superlative quality "greatest", "supreme."
http//experts.about.com/e/a/al/Allahu_Akbar.htmAnd this
In Arabic elatives have the vowel pattern ?aCCaCu (masculine) and CuCCaa (feminine), so from kabiir 'big' we get ?akbaru and kubraa, which mean bigger, biggest, or very big. The word min 'from' is used as the equivalent of 'than' ?inna-l-walada ?akbaru mina-l-bint 'the boy is bigger than the girl'. With no object of comparison, ?inna-l-walada ?akbaru means 'the boy is biggest' or 'the boy is very big'. Equivalently, you can compare him to 'all' or add al- 'the' for an explicit superlative meaning.
http//everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=229737- And a greater favour/approval from God/Allah
Same question? Greater than what ?
In FM?s translation, it is rendered by a superlative ?And the acceptance from God is the most important.?. Is it a mistake?
In the verse , the dhikr is greater that what ? Greater than salat ?
Are you sure the grammar rule you are referring to avails for old Arabic ?
Peace
-
Salaam JM
Allahu Akbar is a shortened form of the Arabic phrase Allahu Akbar min kulli shay, which means "God is greater than everything."
Yes that could be a valid explanation. If we say Allah is the Greatest; the same question is Greatest among what?
Same goes for dhikr. What is dhikr good for? Why do we always have to remember Allah? Some people do good things although they do not believe in God, but they abide with law, reputation, principles, ego, human rights..etc. dhikrul-laah is greater than whatever dictates our behaviour.
As for linguistics rules, I am a bit cautious about always applying them to the Qur'aan, because I believe that they should answer to the Qur'aan, not the other way round. But so far, I do not see a problem with the rules of the elative as demonstrated in the Qur'aan.
-
In FM?s translation, it is rendered by a superlative ?And the acceptance from God is the most important.?. Is it a mistake?
Most important of what?
Not really a mistake, but not literal and not solving the problem. But if I am correcting a translation, I will go for the literal as long as the meaning is preserved. -
Same goes for dhikr. What is dhikr good for? Why do we always have to remember Allah? Some people do good things although they do not believe in God, but they abide with law, reputation, principles, ego, human rights..etc. dhikrul-laah is greater than whatever dictates our behaviour.
OK.
If you don't claim that implies that dhikr is greater than salat, then there is no need for further arguments between us.Peace