The scorching full-moon (shahr ramadan) is here
-
Peace Ayman
and thanks for your answer. What i actually do is fast with the sunnis around me (i live in maghreb) when they fast...not because i share their understanding, but in order to "fast an equal number of other days" - it's really to tough for me during summer. Problem is, soon it will be in summer here too ... well, the year is long to catch up and there is still the solution of feeding the poor - thanks to god he did make the system easy for us.
lk
-
Peace Layth,
I am studying the matter and will revert.
How would you translate
Shahr Ramadhan?Is it
Month of Scorching Heat?I translate it as "scorching full-moon".
A "month" can be any number of days and various ancient and modern calendars had months with 20, 28, 29, 30, 31, etc. When a month begins and ends can be arbitrary. For example in the present Gregorian calendar, it depends on when the year starts, which in itself is arbitrary. The word "shahr" has come to mean month, but this is not its original meaning as used in the great reading. In the great reading, the word means "full-moon".
As for the word "ramadan", it means scorching. It is used to describe things such as reddish color of glowing hot coals. So its primary connotations are reddish glow and heat.
I look forward to the insights from your study. Meanwhile, it is a few minutes away from sunset and today was especially hot so I need to get some water into my system. D
Peace,
Ayman
-
Hello All
As we have seen it before that ONE letter refuted Ayman conjecture regarding Mecca, in here the same story again, ONE letter will show that Ayman got it totally wrong, let?s look at the verse again
The month of Ramadan in which was revealed the Qur'an, a guidance for mankind, and clear proofs of the guidance, and the Criterion (of right and wrong). And whosoever witness the month, let him fast it, and whosoever of you is sick or on a journey, (let him fast the same) number of other days. Allah desireth for you ease; He desireth not hardship for you; and (He desireth) that ye should complete the period, and that ye should magnify Allah for having guided you, and that peradventure ye may be thankful.
(185)
-> What Ayman missed is in this sentence , which means ? And whosoever witness the month, let him fast IT?, is the last letter , the letter ?Ha? at the end in the above sentence, this ?Ha letter is called DAMIR and refers to the word ?Shahr? and is translated as ?IT?, now let?s consider Ayman flawed translation and we will see clearly that it makes no sense to a child
Ayman says Shahr = Full Moon
Let?s replace the Damir ?Ha? with what suppose to be referring to what Ayman is conjecturing regarding the meaning of the word ?Shahr?
-> , which means ? And whosoever witness the FULL MOON, let him fast IT?, ?IT? is referring to the Full Moon according to Ayman flawed translation, this should render the above translation to ? And whosoever witness the FULL MOON, let him fast THE FULL MOON?, now it is getting funny indeed
-> Here you have it everyone, how the hell we should fast the FULL MOON?, don?t you agree that it should be as follow , which means ? And whosoever witness the FULL MOON, let him fast?, The ?Ha?, ?IT? MUST BE REMOVED because again, how the hell we should fast the full moon?
Thank you public
-
Salaam Ahmed,
Sorry, but I'm rather slow here. How is it "fast it" in respect to "month" has more logical merit than its respect to "full-moon"?
Perhaps what you meant was that "let him fast the month of ramadhan" means to fast the entire month? And it is more logical than "let him fast the full-moon of scorching heat"? Please CMIIW.
I just want to make sure. Thanks.
=adley=
-
Salaam Ahmed,
Peace mate,
Sorry, but I'm rather slow here. How is it "fast it" in respect to "month" has more logical merit than its respect to "full-moon"?
Good question bro but I though the answer is logical to all, shahr does not represent a physical object like the moon, and it only represent a time period, therefore IT is far more logical to refer to a time period than referring to a physical object, i.e. whoever is present during that time period should fast that time period, it makes no sense to say whoever present during the full moon should fast the full moon, IT MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE BRO
How about this mate
For those who take an oath for abstention from their wives, a waiting for four months is ordained; if then they return, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
(226)
-> Now we have a serious conflict, because the 4 months may be rendered to 3 months, because if we take the oath of abstaining from our wives just after the full moon, then we need to wait 4 months, but if it happens one day before the full moon then the 4 months become 3 months, do you get it bro?, this is a serious conflict indeed, but it won?t be a conflict if month means shahr, a time period of about 30 days, i.e. it does not matter when we abstain from the wives as at any time we need to wait about 120 days
Perhaps what you meant was that "let him fast the month of ramadhan" means to fast the entire month?
Exactly, it can?t mean anything but that for someone with low/average/high IQ
And it is more logical than "let him fast the full-moon of scorching heat"? Please CMIIW.
Well, if it means that then the IT must be dropped, because the moon is a physical object, also the word Ramadan was not in the sentence , which means ? And whosoever witness the month, let him fast IT?, the word mentioned is only ?Shahr? , therefore, Ayman has no argument from the first place. Simply witnessing was only mentioned to the Shahr not the Shahr of Ramadan
I just want to make sure. Thanks.
=adley=
No worries
Cheers
-
Salaam Ahmed,
Wow, a quick reply again. I'm impressed.
Let me chew on this for a bit. Especially on the "shahr" part of the ayats above.
Thanks.=adley=
Salam mate
No worries bro, take all the time you want, I?m not debating the subject with anyone really, I don't have time to do as such, I?m only providing quranic evidences to the public
However here is another one for you mate
Surely the number of months with Allah is twelve months in Allah's ordinance since the day when He created the heavens and the earth, of these four being sacred; that is the right reckoning; therefore be not unjust to yourselves regarding them, and fight the polytheists all together as they fight you all together; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).
(36)
-> 936 is telling us ? Surely the number of months with Allah is twelve months in Allah's ordinance since the day when He created the heavens and the earth, of these four being sacred; that is the right reckoning; therefore be not unjust to yourselves regarding them, and fight the polytheists all together as they fight you all together; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).
?, which means ? Surely the number of months with Allah is twelve months in Allah's ordinance since the day when He created the heavens and the earth, of these four being sacred?
Now let's replace the word ?Shahr? and its plural ?Shuhur? with ?Full Moon? and it plural ?Full Moons?
means ? Surely the number of FULL MOONS with Allah is twelve FULL MOON in Allah's ordinance since the day when He created the heavens and the earth, of these four being sacred?
Damn I need Einstein to explain that one to me, I guess he will have another blunder, ? the number of FULL MOONS with Allah is twelve FULL MOON?, man I still can?t get it, but what is surprising that Allah is telling us that there are 4 full moons out of those twelve full moons that are sacred without telling us which one of those are sacred?, possibly we needed the prophet to explain that one to us I reckon, and I'm sure he did
Peace bro
-
Peace all,
I wanted to go back a bit to the point Elke made earlier...
all that i know is that right now we have over 40 degr? celsius around here... and that god tells us that he doesn't want any hardship in religion !
I also agree that there should be no hardship. However, I think it's important to note that this term is relative. Ofcourse it depends on the person's situation, enviroment, etc. But just as an example, I am currently abstaining from (approximately) 4.15am to 9.45pm. We have temperatures of about 100 degrees Farenhiet and slightly more right now, I have an on and off stomach ulcer condition, and I still do it. I guess what I'm trying to say is, I could easily say, this is too hard, I'm going to wait till December where we have much shorter days, much cooler and no 'hardship'.Also remember in the verse just before that talks about hardship...
- A few number of days. Whoever of you is ill or traveling, then the same number from different days; and as for those who can do so but with difficulty, they may redeem by feeding the needy. And whoever does good voluntarily, then it is better for him. And if you abstain it is better for you if you knew.
I like to relate this to another verse that I realize has nothing to do with abstention, but maybe something to think about...
- Those who have remained behind are content with their position behind God?s messenger, and they disliked to strive with their wealth and lives in the cause of God; and they Say ?Do not march out in the heat.? Say ?The fire of Hell is far hotter,? if they could only understand.
Peace
-
Salaam.
I just started fasting today, 13. 07. 2006 before the sunrise, i ate a peach, prayed and than fasted until 2052, when the sun set. You have no idea how beautiful it is to eat food and people who don't fast have no idea what blessing a food is.
Food is one of the best blessing Allah Most Powerful has given us. Food is more than just oranges, bread, ice cream, potatoes, tomotaoes, carrots, cookies, milk, apples, salad, salami, chocolate, sugar, spice, fried duck, spicy chicken, spicy duck with pineapple, .....
Food is a bliss, food is something we should be grateful for 24/7, people. Dear sisters and brothers, be thankful to Allah Almighty that He has given us so much food and do not throw any food away, always eat the last drop. When i eat a yougurt, for example, i always lick the last drop of it and i sometimes see in the city, in the garbages many yogurt's cans and there's still some yogurt left!
There's this neighbor here and he wastes half a bottle of coke! He's not exactly rich but it makes me angry when i see our sisters and brothers in Africa suffering .,....man, some poeple are just asking for Hell!
May Allah has mercy on all of us and guides us to Eden.
Salaam. -
Peace Samia,
Does "the scorching full moon" appear only once a year?
Thank you for your question. The short answer is yes.
The term scorching has two connotations reddish color and heat. Those two attributes combine only for the full-moon after the summer solstice. I explained to brother Layth in a post above why this is consistent due to the relative positions of the sun and the moon (when the sun is at its highest around the summer solstice, the moon is at its lowest).
Peace,
Ayman
-
Peace all,
As we have seen it before that ONE letter refuted Ayman conjecture regarding Mecca,
Only in the eyes of those who can't let go of their illogical emotional attachment to Mecca's pagan shrines and rituals.
-> What Ayman missed is in this sentence , which means ? And whosoever witness the month, let him fast IT?, is the last letter , the letter ?Ha? at the end in the above sentence, this ?Ha letter is called DAMIR and refers to the word ?Shahr? and is translated as ?IT?, now let?s consider Ayman flawed translation and we will see clearly that it makes no sense to a child
Ayman says Shahr = Full Moon
Let?s replace the Damir ?Ha? with what suppose to be referring to what Ayman is conjecturing regarding the meaning of the word ?Shahr?
-> , which means ? And whosoever witness the FULL MOON, let him fast IT?, ?IT? is referring to the Full Moon according to Ayman flawed translation, this should render the above translation to ? And whosoever witness the FULL MOON, let him fast THE FULL MOON?, now it is getting funny indeed
-> Here you have it everyone, how the hell we should fast the FULL MOON?, don?t you agree that it should be as follow , which means ? And whosoever witness the FULL MOON, let him fast?, The ?Ha?, ?IT? MUST BE REMOVED because again, how the hell we should fast the full moon?
Ahmed is once again using his limited Modern Arabic to try to explain classical quranic Arabic so all that this proves is that he is ignorant of the fact that they are different in many respects. This is not his fault because those are facts that Arabic speakers are generally never taught at school or even in advanced Arabic programs.
This fact would have been clearly obvious had he bothered to read a couple of sentences earlier in Chapter 2 (CAPS mine)
002.180
YUSUFALI It is prescribed, when death approaches any of you, if he leave any goods that he make a bequest (FEMININE) to parents and next of kin, according to reasonable usage; this is due from the Allah-fearing.002.181
YUSUFALI If anyone changes the bequest (MASCULINE) after hearing it (MASCULINE), the guilt shall be on those who make the change. For Allah hears and knows (All things).What is happening here? According to Arabic grammar rules the Damir "h"/ referring to a masculine entity should actually be "haa"/ because "alwasiat"/ is clearly feminine. So does The God makes grammatical errors or is it a hint about what the Damir in 2181 and 2185 actually refers to?
To understand this, we must understand what is prescribed in 2180 in relation to the mentioned bequest (the will). In 2180 the bequest is described as "khayran alwasiyat", which means "a good bequest". The bequest is further qualified as "bi al-ma3roof", which means "in accordance to kindness". For example, what if someone makes a bequest that all his money should be piled up and burned or what if someone decides to leave all his possessions to his dog instead of his family? Is this a "good bequest" that is in accordance to what is known to be kind? Of course not! So in such cases, "changing the bequest" is not a crime. However, when we apply Ahmed's logic to 2181 it makes it a crime since according to him the possessive/"h" refers to the bequest not to "what is prescribed in relation to the bequest". Unfortunately for him, the gender disagreement completely demolishes his theory. Pointing the attention to "what is in accordance with the prescription" (masculine) and not just the "bequest" (feminine) is the reason for the lack of gender agreement. So let's correct Yusufali's translation of 2181 above
002.181
YUSUFALI If anyone changes it (what is in accordance with the prescription) after hearing it (what is in accordance with the prescription), the guilt shall be on those who make the change. For Allah hears and knows (All things).In 2185, we have the same exact phenomenon but it is a little more difficult to see because unlike "wasiyat", the word "shahr" happens to be masculine. However, similar to 2181, if one follows Ahmed's interpretation, one can clearly see logical problems. According to Ahmed's interpretation, "shahr" means month so 2185 would be saying abstain the whole month. So is it a prescription to die from thirst and starvation? Of course not! Similar to 2180-181, to understand the Damir "h", we must understand what is prescribed in relation to abstinence. Notice that 2180 starts by using the verb "kutib" (it is prescribed) when talking about the bequest exactly like 2183 starts by using the verb "kutib" (it is prescribed) when talking about the abstinence. So similar to 2181, the Damir "h" points the attention to "what is in accordance with the prescription" and not just the "full-moon". Similar to 2181 above, let's correct this part of Ahmed's translation
2185
The month of Ramadan in which was revealed the Qur'an, a guidance for mankind, and clear proofs of the guidance, and the Criterion (of right and wrong). And whosoever witness the month, let him fast it (what is in accordance with the prescription), and whosoever of you is sick or on a journey, (let him fast the same) number of other days. Allah desireth for you ease; He desireth not hardship for you; and (He desireth) that ye should complete the period, and that ye should magnify Allah for having guided you, and that peradventure ye may be thankful.Clearly, as in 2181 where we are not to change "what is in accordance with the prescription", in 2185 we are to abstain "what is in accordance with the prescription".
In addition to the above, interpreting "shahr" as "month" or 30 day period creates several more contradictions
- Contradiction with 2184, which clearly says that the fast is for a FEW days.
- Contradiciton with 971, which says that the great reading was descended in ONE night, while according to Ahmed 2185 says that it was descended in a whole month.
The interpretation of "shahr" as full-moon resolves all those contradictions and everything simply falls into place.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Peace all,
How about this mate
For those who take an oath for abstention from their wives, a waiting for four months is ordained; if then they return, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
(226)
-> Now we have a serious conflict, because the 4 months may be rendered to 3 months, because if we take the oath of abstaining from our wives just after the full moon, then we need to wait 4 months, but if it happens one day before the full moon then the 4 months become 3 months, do you get it bro?, this is a serious conflict indeed, but it won?t be a conflict if month means shahr, a time period of about 30 days, i.e. it does not matter when we abstain from the wives as at any time we need to wait about 120 days
Again, all that this proves is that our "mate" Ahmed only reads through his narrow preconceptions. Had he bothered to read a couple of lines down to 2228 then he would have seen that 2226 actually confirms the meaning of full-moon.
2228 tells the divorced women to wait three menstruations. Counting menstruations is variable depending on when we start the count, exactly like counting full-moons. So 2226-228 actually confirms the meaning of full-moon.
One has to understand that The God's message is universal. It is not dependent on a particular manmade culture. For example, four months would be different in Saudi Arabia than in Australia because different calendars are used. Some ancient cultures even had months consisting of 20 days.
In both 2226 and 2228, The God gives us natural phenomena, not manmade divisions, to time the waiting periods. In 2226 it is the full-moon and in 2228 it is menstrual cycles. The way we count those two natural phenomena is the same and there is going to be similar variability based on when we start the counting. This is completely natural and consistent with the universal message of the great reading.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Peace all,
However here is another one for you mate
Surely the number of months with Allah is twelve months in Allah's ordinance since the day when He created the heavens and the earth, of these four being sacred; that is the right reckoning; therefore be not unjust to yourselves regarding them, and fight the polytheists all together as they fight you all together; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).
(36)
-> 936 is telling us ? Surely the number of months with Allah is twelve months in Allah's ordinance since the day when He created the heavens and the earth, of these four being sacred; that is the right reckoning; therefore be not unjust to yourselves regarding them, and fight the polytheists all together as they fight you all together; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).
?, which means ? Surely the number of months with Allah is twelve months in Allah's ordinance since the day when He created the heavens and the earth, of these four being sacred?
Now let's replace the word ?Shahr? and its plural ?Shuhur? with ?Full Moon? and it plural ?Full Moons? means ? Surely the number of FULL MOONS with Allah is twelve FULL MOON in Allah's ordinance since the day when He created the heavens and the earth, of these four being sacred?
Damn I need Einstein to explain that one to me, I guess he will have another blunder, ? the number of FULL MOONS with Allah is twelve FULL MOON?, man I still can?t get it, but what is surprising that Allah is telling us that there are 4 full moons out of those twelve full moons that are sacred without telling us which one of those are sacred?, possibly we needed the prophet to explain that one to us I reckon, and I'm sure he did
Ahmed might want to ask Einstein or the prophet (since both are equally dead)
"hey mate, explain to me how the number of months with Allah is twelve months in Allah's ordinance since the day when He created the heavens and the earth."
If they can answer, they will probably tell him
"Listen mate, what you are saying is complete nonsense. The number of months is certainly a lot more than 12 since the day The God created the heavens and the earth".
In fact, we know that the earth is a few billions of years old so the number of months (whatever months mean) is certainly a least in the billions since The God created the heavens and the earth.
Certainly, Ahmed's understanding is wrong. To correct his understanding, he must first realize that The God doesn't use words haphazardly. In 936, the word "number" (Arabic 3adad) doesn't occur. The exact word used is "count" (Arabic 3idah). The difference is that unlike "3adad" (an absolute number), "3idah" involves an act of counting.
So let's correct Ahmed's translation above with what 936 is actually saying
- Surely the count of full-moons with The God is twelve full-moons in The God's ordinance since the day when He created the heavens and the earth, of these four being restricted; that is the right obligation; therefore be not unjust to yourselves regarding them, and fight the polytheists all together as they fight you all together; and know that The God is with those who are forethoughtful.
Now it becomes clear that we are to count 12 full-moons and not that the absolute number of full-moons is 12. So this means that we count 12 full-moons in a year (which is certainly a solar year according to 1712). It is not a coincidence that this happens to be the most simple and fool-proof mechanism for intercalation. Using this system, we always count exactly 12 full-moons every single year without fractions. In the years where 13 full-moons are observed, we simply skip counting the 13th moon and this automatically synchronizes the lunar cycle with the seasons of the solar year. There is no simpler mechanism and this is part of what makes 936 truly amazing.
Now, out of the count of the 12 full-moons, we should count the first 4 as restricted (this is the forethoughtful thing to do). Again, Ahmed needs to realize that The God doesn't use words haphazardly. The word "sacred" (Arabic "qudoos" doesn't occur in the passage. The word used is "7urum", which means restricted, unless Ahmed wants to propose that the pig's meat is made sacred for us (see 53). The only restriction we are told about in relation to this in the great reading is the restriction on hunting wildlife (51).
It is interesting that according to Classical Arabic dictionaries "taramad", which is related to the word "ramadan", means a method of hunting at the hot time of the year by chasing prey until it falls down by itself from heat exhaustion. Of course, the animals that would fall down first are the youngest because they are the weakest. It is not a coincidence that most wild animals and birds give birth in the spring and summer. It is also not a coincidence that summer is when crops are plentiful and the birth rates of domesticated animals are highest (domesticated animals are exempt from the restriction per 51). So the restriction on hunting during the summer protects wild animals that are born or newly born until they can fend for themselves. It also protects their mothers because if a hunter kills the mother, he would be killing all of her young offspring who still rely on her. At the same time, the restriction doesn't cause people to starve because those that normally rely on hunting for food can substitute produce from plant sources and meat from domesticated animals whose young can be cared for by humans even if the mother is slaughtered.
Even here in the US, summer is the season when hunting of most animals and birds is restricted and fall is when their hunting is resumed. So people have naturally realized that this is the best way to protect wildlife.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Hello
I will respond to Ayman reply as I go due to the fact I?m very busy so I will break it up and respond bit by bit when I have time
As we have seen it before that ONE letter refuted Ayman conjecture regarding Mecca,
Only in the eyes of those who can't let go of their illogical emotional attachment to Mecca's pagan shrines and rituals.
Another silly comment by you, well my reply is this, when the Quran aloners are cornered they resort to the above used by date non sense sort of rants
Let me remind you with the past then, ?Bi Batn Mecca?, the Bi must have a place after it, now your funny refute was a sentence you made up yourself that the Bi can be used in such non sensible manner, this is just to remind you
-> What Ayman missed is in this sentence , which means ? And whosoever witness the month, let him fast IT?, is the last letter , the letter ?Ha? at the end in the above sentence, this ?Ha letter is called DAMIR and refers to the word ?Shahr? and is translated as ?IT?, now let?s consider Ayman flawed translation and we will see clearly that it makes no sense to a child
Ayman says Shahr = Full Moon
Let?s replace the Damir ?Ha? with what suppose to be referring to what Ayman is conjecturing regarding the meaning of the word ?Shahr?
-> , which means ? And whosoever witness the FULL MOON, let him fast IT?, ?IT? is referring to the Full Moon according to Ayman flawed translation, this should render the above translation to ? And whosoever witness the FULL MOON, let him fast THE FULL MOON?, now it is getting funny indeed
-> Here you have it everyone, how the hell we should fast the FULL MOON?, don?t you agree that it should be as follow , which means ? And whosoever witness the FULL MOON, let him fast?, The ?Ha?, ?IT? MUST BE REMOVED because again, how the hell we should fast the full moon?
Ahmed is once again using his limited Modern Arabic to try to explain classical quranic Arabic so all that this proves is that he is ignorant of the fact that they are different in many respects.
Haha, resorting to character attack about my knowledge experience and the fact of the matter you are really silly because you know nothing about what I know and what I learnt in life, just bloody respond to my Quran comments and don?t expose your weakness by attacking my life experience and my knowledge
See I only attacked your flawed interpretation, I called your interpretation flawed but I didn?t call you flawed nor I discussed your learning at schools, but I tell you mate, don?t come near that or you will be cornered further, just try to be professional and respond to my evidences not to my charachter
This is not his fault because those are facts that Arabic speakers are generally never taught at school or even in advanced Arabic programs.
See, how weak you are, LOL, I guess you can?t see it but I?m sure many can
This fact would have been clearly obvious had he bothered to read a couple of sentences earlier in Chapter 2 (CAPS mine)
002.180
YUSUFALI It is prescribed, when death approaches any of you, if he leave any goods that he make a bequest (FEMININE) to parents and next of kin, according to reasonable usage; this is due from the Allah-fearing.002.181
YUSUFALI If anyone changes the bequest (MASCULINE) after hearing it (MASCULINE), the guilt shall be on those who make the change. For Allah hears and knows (All things).Another case of desperation by Ayman, this is way too much fun for me, LOL, let?s see what he has to say, I hope it makes sense tough
What is happening here?
Wow, a grammar error or what?
According to Arabic grammar rules the Damir "h"/ referring to a masculine entity should actually be "haa"/ because "alwasiat"/ is clearly feminine. So does The God makes grammatical errors or is it a hint about what the Damir in 2181 and 2185 actually refers to?
LOL, ok I?m listening
To understand this, we must understand what is prescribed in 2180 in relation to the mentioned bequest (the will). In 2180 the bequest is described as "khayran alwasiyat", which means "a good bequest". The bequest is further qualified as "bi al-ma3roof", which means "in accordance to kindness". For example, what if someone makes a bequest that all his money should be piled up and burned or what if someone decides to leave all his possessions to his dog instead of his family?
Hmmm, what all that has to do with it?, come on get into it and waste no more time please
Is it a grammar error or an insight from you?
Is this a "good bequest" that is in accordance to what is known to be kind? Of course not! So in such cases, "changing the bequest" is not a crime.
Far out, what all that has to do with it mister Ayman?
However, when we apply Ahmed's logic to 2181 it makes it a crime since according to him the possessive/"h" refers to the bequest not to "what is prescribed in relation to the bequest". Unfortunately for him, the gender disagreement completely demolishes his theory.
Here we go, now I got you cornered again, so you wasted all the above time to tell us the following
- The ?Ha? in the following words in 2181 , , , is referring to a masculine
- While it should be referring to a feminine ?Wasiah?
I like it in points
Ahmed says
Mister Ayman, why you want to use the Ha in 2181 to refer to the feminine Wasiah in 2180?
They are not in the same sentence mister Ayman, nor in the same verse, well while I agree that it is virtually may be referring the ACTION of Wasiah mentioned earlier, but the action was not really the wasiah rather ?THE QAWL THEY HEARD FROM THE DECEASED BEFORE DEATH?, that Qawl means ?Saying? and is masculine, in fact clearly and irrefutably 2181 tell us that this is exactly what happned IT WAS SAID ?A Qawl?, the hint is the word , I.E ?HEARD IT?, and this also apply to the masculine ?Qawl? because Qawl is only heard, Wasiah can be written or said and the case in 181, IT IS CLEAR THAT IT WAS ?SAID? from the word
Pointing the attention to "what is in accordance with the prescription" (masculine) and not just the "bequest" (feminine) is the reason for the lack of gender agreement. So let's correct Yusufali's translation of 2181 above
I have to dismiss your argument bro for the following reason
You are linking the masculine Damir ?Ha? to another word in another sentence and another verse, while I agree it is very possible however we have a clue in 2181 describing the way the Wasiah was done by the deceased, the key word is i.e ?Heard IT?, therefore the Wasiah can be said or written, 2181 clearly and irrefutably confirm that was only SAID, and this means it was a Qawl and this means the Ha is referring to the OMMITTED masculine Qawl
You have no argument indeed regarding 2180-181, and what you are showing is a clear cut case of desperation like your funny Arabic sentence to refute ?Bi Batn Mecca?, I?m still laughing on that one
Now I had to go and will continue later but I hope you have fun correcting YA translation, I don?t like him anyway
I hope you refrain from responding until I respond to all your comments
Salam
-
002.181
YUSUFALI If anyone changes it (what is in accordance with the prescription) after hearing it (what is in accordance with the prescription), the guilt shall be on those who make the change. For Allah hears and knows (All things).In 2185, we have the same exact phenomenon but it is a little more difficult to see because unlike "wasiyat", the word "shahr" happens to be masculine. However, similar to 2181, if one follows Ahmed's interpretation, one can clearly see logical problems. According to Ahmed's interpretation, "shahr" means month so 2185 would be saying abstain the whole month. So is it a prescription to die from thirst and starvation? Of course not! Similar to 2180-181, to understand the Damir "h", we must understand what is prescribed in relation to abstinence. Notice that 2180 starts by using the verb "kutib" (it is prescribed) when talking about the bequest exactly like 2183 starts by using the verb "kutib" (it is prescribed) when talking about the abstinence. So similar to 2181, the Damir "h" points the attention to "what is in accordance with the prescription" and not just the "full-moon". Similar to 2181 above, let's correct this part of Ahmed's translation
It seems you had a lot of fun correcting YA, however you are still on the wrong track as the word ?Samaahu? refuted you argument of desperation
2185
The month of Ramadan in which was revealed the Qur'an, a guidance for mankind, and clear proofs of the guidance, and the Criterion (of right and wrong). And whosoever witness the month, let him fast it (what is in accordance with the prescription), and whosoever of you is sick or on a journey, (let him fast the same) number of other days. Allah desireth for you ease; He desireth not hardship for you; and (He desireth) that ye should complete the period, and that ye should magnify Allah for having guided you, and that peradventure ye may be thankful.Clearly, as in 2181 where we are not to change "what is in accordance with the prescription", in 2185 we are to abstain "what is in accordance with the prescription".
In addition to the above, interpreting "shahr" as "month" or 30 day period creates several more contradictions
- Contradiction with 2184, which clearly says that the fast is for a FEW days.
YUSUFALI (Fasting) for a fixed number of days; but if any of you is ill, or on a journey, the prescribed number (Should be made up) from days later. For those who can do it (With hardship), is a ransom, the feeding of one that is indigent. But he that will give more, of his own free will,- it is better for him. And it is better for you that ye fast, if ye only knew.
PICKTHAL (Fast) a certain number of days; and (for) him who is sick among you, or on a journey, (the same) number of other days; and for those who can afford it there is a ransom the feeding of a man in need - but whoso doeth good of his own accord, it is better for him and that ye fast is better for you if ye did but know ?
SHAKIR For a certain number of days; but whoever among you is sick or on a journey, then (he shall fast) a (like) number of other days; and those who are not able to do it may effect a redemption by feeding a poor man; so whoever does good spontaneously it is better for him; and that you fast is better for you if you know.
(184)
-> Mate,. I?m tired of cornering you, ok you just proved your case of desperation, the verse above never said A FEW DAYS, this is what you are manipulating indeed, but you are now stretching it beyond desperation, the verse above never ever said ? A FEW DAYS?, it only said ? ?, ?Ayaman Ma?dodat?, all translators obviously got it right as seen below
- Fasting) for a fixed number of days;
- (Fast) a certain number of days
- For a certain number of days
I guess you need to correct all of them in the great reading you are authoring
Salam
-
- Contradiciton with 971, which says that the great reading was descended in ONE night, while according to Ahmed 2185 says that it was descended in a whole month.
Did I say that it was sent in one month, come on don?t lie or Santa will not come to you
But again you have no argument in 971, but your insistence to confirm your desperation is very much appreciated by me
Let?s look at 971
We have indeed revealed this (Message) in the Night of Power
(1)
_> Mate, why you are saying that the Quran was revealed complete in ne Laylat Qadr?, does 971 say that?, well is Laylat Al Qadr considered one night only in the whole timeline from creation to the JD?, well it is obvious that the Quran was revealed on that night when it comes
I have to say this bro
Slam dunk
Thank you danish
The interpretation of "shahr" as full-moon resolves all those contradictions and everything simply falls into place.
Peace,
Ayman
Yeh in your fantasy world of tailored Quran contradictions
Salam
-
Salam all,
.....................
In addition to the above, interpreting "shahr" as "month" or 30 day period creates several more contradictions- Contradiction with 2184, which clearly says that the fast is for a FEW days.
- Contradiciton with 971, which says that the great reading was descended in ONE night, while according to Ahmed 2185 says that it was descended in a whole month.
The interpretation of "shahr" as full-moon resolves all those contradictions and everything simply falls into place.
.......................
I do not see why a 30-day month would create several contraditions and this is my explanation and maybe Samia can correct me from a language perspective-).
-- In verse 2184 "ayam ma'3doudattin" literally means days "counted". I don't see the "few" like "qalil" we see it applied to numbers in other verses and an example of that is the way the prophet dream was described in terms of the enemy numbers. "ma3doudattin" is from 3adad, so count. It can be 20, 30, 50 as long as it is "counting" (keeping track of the count), I dont' see any sense of "few" but rather of "fixed/defined/known/counted number", so the count can be 30 days if the "shahr" means month and I believe it is.
--In verse 2185, it is stated the month of ramadhan "alathi unzila FIHI al-Qur'an" literally in which was descended the Quran. An analysis of the verb "un'zila" (descended) through the 95 verses that burhan engine displays, clearly shows that it is about the event and not time and thus my understanding of the verse 2185 is that the begining of the Quran revelation or the start to reveal the Quran occured in the month of Ramadhan. "fihi" is really obvious here, and that particular day the revelation started is the one mentioned in verse 971 because a day belongs to a month. So I don't see any contradiction in saying that the Quran started to be descended to the prophet one day in the month of ramadhan.
Shahr as full moon would not resolve any contradictions since these latter do not even exist unless one choses a particular translation like "ma3doudattin" for "few" beside what Ahmed clearly described as examples that would not make sense if shahr is replaced by "full moon".
Having said that, again everyone is entitled to his/her understanding and I would not be interested in debating people and labels but rather the verses.Anybody here who can tell me why the word "fasting" is not used for "sawn" but instead "abstnence"? I know some of you derived that meaning from the verse on Mary when she was asked to fast and not talk to anybody but what is wrong with the word "fasting"? "abstinence" has a strong connotation of abstaining from sex and is a birth control mean. Please google that word and you'll see what I am talking about. Unless "sawn" mainly means no sex for a period of time but I understand you are also avoiding eating and drinking, no?
Anyway, have you all a blessed fasting and may God the All-Mighty accept it from all of you who are fasting now. For me, it will be a full month (30 days) starting at the end of September God willing. Happy ramadan to all of you! Peace. Myr.
