Proper Name "Muslim"
-
Salaam Kyle,
Does it say anywhere that Abraham had any authority to NAME us? Thereby making a sect? No, it was just a simple observation, that we were/are peaceful.
Abraham did not, I agree, but The God surely has that authority. (I think 2278 was talking about The God as the one who did the naming).
Mankinds problem is that it is stuck in the physical realm, so it always wants to physicalize things, make them literal, seperate, etc. This is the same fate of "descriptions" which have become proper names, but in some cultures are still used as descriptions
Agree, and I did on my previous replies to the others mentioned that besides in 2278, the word "al-muslimin" is mostly used to describe (hence, a common noun) instead of naming things to give them proper names. Thanks, especially for this last paragraph; as I too like to read the quran metaphorically ;D.
=adley=
-
Salaam Ayman,
Thank you for your kind words and your input.
Let's think about this for a minute. Were Abraham's followers named what would have been at their time a gibberish word from a future language that wasn't even invented yet? I don't think so.
Yes, I know about this problem too as stated in my previous replies regarding Fir'aun and Noah. I am pretty sure that Ibrahim didn't speak Arabic. So I agree with your following paragraph.
Proposing that "al-muslimeen" in 2278 is a proper name is no different than proposing that 1400 years ago the followers of the prophet were actually called "The Submitters" long before Modern English was invented. Saying "The Submitters" to Arabs 1400 years ago or "Al Muslimeen" to Ibrahim's followers a few thousand years earlier would have sounded just as gibberish as saying "Qasdhwdkfvwdhcv" to people on this thread. It will still be gibberish to everyone here even if thousands of years from now some yet to be invented language will have "qasdhwdkfvwdhcv" as a meaningful word.
However, this leads me to a question
By what standard or rule we can objectively decide that a word, or a combination of words, is a proper name as it is used in the quran?From this discussion, I get the temporary conclusion that just because "ism", "asma", or "samma" is used before or after the word(s) in concern, does not make that word(s) a proper name.
=adley=
-
Salaam AhmedBahgat,
I know that by refering to the most popularly-used word, in this case "Muslim", is probably the most efficient way of identifying a certain group of people.
But, from your post, you said that the word is a noun (used or functions as a name), not a proper name. Or are you really saying that "al-muslimin" is a proper name? Thanks for sharing your knowledge.
=adley=
Peace bro
Al Muslimeen is of course a proper name however the Action "Aslam" was also used many ytimes in the Quran,
so we have an action which is "Aslam" and we have a noun for that person doing this action the noun is "Muslim" and any noun a name of a thing for example, plane is a noun and it refers to a plane i.e it is the name of a plane, now when the plane flies, that is totally different thing
Salam
-
Wakas2278 can be seen as a proper name, but the vast majority of its usage is as a common word. Thus even if one takes it as a proper name that doesn't discount that it has an actual meaning. It is clear from my studies that its primary signification is as a description, not as a proper noun, but that doesn't mean it cant be used as such.
Sure it can but will you be durable enough to take on the task of clearing up the perpetual confusion of people mistaking you for the traditionalists? I wouldn't, the last decade has been tiring.
-
I think I understand your point that the proper names mention in 5319-20 are defined based on the context that these were "things" that were created and thus given the names/lables so that future generations can easily refer them.
Yes, 'unrealities' made 'realities' (hence the phrase 'tahwaa an-nafs' by our delusions. I don't know the motivations for doing so except kufr though.
But, is it okay to say that names that were the result of human-made concepts or ideologies can be perfectly defined as proper names, whereas the act of naming by The God, as in 2278, is not? I mean, there is an underlying concept, essence, and ideology (haven't really decide what they really are yet) contained in the word "al-muslimin", even though it came from The God; thus, making "al-muslimin" a good candidate for a proper name.
They didn't name it, they 'essentialised' it. They took something imaginary and made it real. God has the authority, so his essentialisation of al-muslimeen is real and works in reality.
But let me read what others have to say first. Thanks for sharing bro.
No, no...thank you for raising this issue.
-
Adley, for the names of laat, manaat and uzza, please to go www.the-quran.org and see the lecture called 'what al-quraan says about allah and aaliha'. You'll benefit, trust me.
-
Adley And We helped the Children of Israel cross the sea, and Pharaoh and his soldiers followed them out of hatred and animosity. But when he was certain to drown, he said "I believe that there is no god except the One in whom the Children of Israel believe, and I am of those who have surrendered (al-muslimin).
Well, that ayat probably a good indicator of why "al-muslimi" is not a proper name but a common noun. Except if the Pharaoh spoke Arabic when he was drowned. The same thing can be said I guess to the story of Noah in 1071-72 where "al-muslimin" cannot be a proper name unless Noah spoke Arabic.
Firaun said this because he believed ('mantu 'Annahu L 'Ilha 'Ill Al-Ladh 'manat Bihi Ban 'Isr'la ) in as the COI believed and then, as a consequence , he understood the essence of things ( Wa 'An Mina Al-Muslimna ) , that being al-muslimeen was the natural consequence of this.
-
Adley And We helped the Children of Israel cross the sea, and Pharaoh and his soldiers followed them out of hatred and animosity. But when he was certain to drown, he said "I believe that there is no god except the One in whom the Children of Israel believe, and I am of those who have surrendered (al-muslimin).
Well, that ayat probably a good indicator of why "al-muslimi" is not a proper name but a common noun. Except if the Pharaoh spoke Arabic when he was drowned. The same thing can be said I guess to the story of Noah in 1071-72 where "al-muslimin" cannot be a proper name unless Noah spoke Arabic.
Firaun said this because he believed ('mantu 'Annahu L 'Ilha 'Ill Al-Ladh 'manat Bihi Ban 'Isr'la ) in as the COI believed and then, as a consequence , he understood the essence of things ( Wa 'An Mina Al-Muslimna ) , that being al-muslimeen was the natural consequence of this.
Good point bro, so after he believed he was thinking that he now belongs to a group called Muslimin "Min Al Muslimin", "From Al Muslimin", like when you say "From The Amercians"
Salam
-
Salaam MQuran,
They didn't name it, they 'essentialised' it. They took something imaginary and made it real. God has the authority, so his essentialisation of al-muslimeen is real and works in reality.
So, I guess this is like turning to your "jinns" for help eh? ;D
This is interesting indeed, but when I think about it, perhaps the concept of a deity was created first and then its supposed physical form was created later to fit the idea/concept/myth/purpose surrounding that deity.An example could be a deity named "Jesus the Son of God" or "Jesus the God" (whichever you prefer ;D). The idea/concept of "saviour" and pretty much what Jesus the Deity (JTD) we now know has been in circulation for quite a while before people even knew the name Jesus. But later on these ideas/concepts needed something physical; so thus JTD was made to fit those ideas/concepts.
No, no...thank you for raising this issue.
You're too kind bro in saying that to me -- a confused man
Adley, for the names of laat, manaat and uzza, please to go www.the-quran.org and see the lecture called 'what al-quraan says about allah and aaliha'. You'll benefit, trust me.
Is there any other alternatives beside streaming? Download would be much better, because as of now I couldn't really connect to the Internet at home; and at the office I don't usually get the luxury of watching videos while the rest of my colleagues are working ;D
However, I read a glimpse about "The Would Be" or "The If Only" and I have to say I'm even more curious now about this video. Hopefully I will be able to watch it soon
Firaun said this because he believed ('mantu 'Annahu L 'Ilha 'Ill Al-Ladh 'manat Bihi Ban 'Isr'la ) in as the COI believed and then, as a consequence , he understood the essence of things ( Wa 'An Mina Al-Muslimna ) , that being al-muslimeen was the natural consequence of this.
The more I think of it, the more it is more about essence rather than... (hmm...)... lable?
Re-reading all the ayats that have "al-muslimin" besides 2278 do make me think that "al-muslimin" is, as you said above, the consequence.My my, perhaps after watching the video I can have a lot better information regarding proper names and the rules of determining them in the quran. ;D
=adley=
-
Peace be upon you,
Sorry, yes it is the God that has described us as peacful(muslim), not Ibrahim. All else still stands. the word "muslim" is a description, or else we should all be going around saying "Hey Muslim Jr.", "Hey Muslim the IV", we would all be literally NAMED "Muslim".
One more question for stimulation. Why are all the suppossed "names" in this Text just given as first names? None of these people had last names or more than one word in thier names? Hmmmmm
-
Salaam Kyle,
Nice question regarding first names. Well, I don't know whether last names are so important, because in my country, lots of people do not have a last name.
But let's say these "names" are just descriptions or hints about a certain trait or character, then each of these "names" should be translatable. How do you translate "maryam"? What are its roots? Taking the character Maryam symbolically does make sense to me, especially the ruh al-qudus was given to this feminine character and later on produces a male character which strengthened by the same ruh al-qudus.
=adley=
-
KyleSorry, yes it is the God that has described us as peacful(muslim), not Ibrahim. All else still stands. the word "muslim" is a description, or else we should all be going around saying "Hey Muslim Jr.", "Hey Muslim the IV", we would all be literally NAMED "Muslim".
Lol, never thought of it that way. After all, AQ doesn't say 'samma' your GROUP but 'samma' YOU. Hahah, can we still keep our lasts names, you think, Mr Muslim Kyle?
One more question for stimulation. Why are all the suppossed "names" in this Text just given as first names? None of these people had last names or more than one word in thier names? Hmmmmm
Adley's answer seems correctBut let's say these "names" are just descriptions or hints about a certain trait or character, then each of these "names" should be translatable. How do you translate "maryam"? What are its roots? Taking the character Maryam symbolically does make sense to me, especially the ruh al-qudus was given to this feminine character and later on produces a male character which strengthened by the same ruh al-qudus.
To me, historically, none of these people matter. What matters is what has been yielded to us by snapshots given by AQ. Maryam as an sign in souls (41/53) can give us the lesson of how to birth into the new self, Isa, who then heals Bani Israil.
-
Peace be upon you all,
I think all of the descriptions have meaning, but I dont know what many of them mean. But as MQ stated, it is the lesson that gives us the benefit and that is what I seek.
-
Salaam Kyle,
I agree with you that all descriptions must have a meaning. Perhaps you can share with us on what you already know of these descriptions and probably all of us can try to decipher what the now still uknowns are? It could lead an interesting discussion maybe. )
=adley=
-
Peace brothers Kyle, Adley, all,
I think all of the descriptions have meaning, but I dont know what many of them mean. But as MQ stated, it is the lesson that gives us the benefit and that is what I seek.
I think that names such as Maryam, Abraham, Ismail are proper names that don't have meanings or their meaning became completely irrelevant to the message and this is why The God didn't translate them to Arabic. This goes back to address the following question by Adley
By what standard or rule we can objectively decide that a word, or a combination of words, is a proper name as it is used in the quran?
Proper names are not translated. So if The God didn't translate a word such as Ibrahim from whatever it meant in Kanaanite or Maryam from whatever it meant in Hebrew into Arabic then they are proper names. On the other hand, we see that common nouns fit in the context. For example "mecca"/destruction in 4824 perfectly fit in the context. Similarly, the common noun "mohamed" fits in the context where it is used and hence should be taken as a common noun and not a proper name.
Our frst priority should be to try translate everything and take it as common noun. It is only when a word was clearly borrowed wholeheartedly as a proper name from a language that is older than Arabic and whose translation leads to nonsense that it may be taken as a proper name. I mentioned the examples above of Ibrahim and Maryam. Another example, is Allat, AlUzza and Manat, which are orginally Nabataean proper names and thus translating them leads to nonsense because certainly they don't describe the reality of those idols.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Salaam all
As someone mentioned, the word "muslim" is ism faa3el of the verb aslam. The point is can you use this "grammatical construction" in a context where it does not have an underlying meaning of "submitting to God"? This is not valid in the case of its translation (submitter), because it could be used in different contexts. That's what God meant by "It is Him who named you muslims". I believe, therefore, this word may not be translated, and be has to be treated as proper name.
Another view
Aymen made a good observation, that there must have been another word said to Abraham with the same meaning. Perhaps it had the same semantic charactter as "muslims", i.e. it could not be used in a different context.Therefore, if we are to translate the word "muslim", it must be into another word that could not be used in any other context than to God (submitter to God),for example; not just (submitter).
-
Peace Samia,
As someone mentioned, the word "muslim" is ism faa3el of the verb aslam. The point is can you use this "grammatical construction" in a context where it does not have an underlying meaning of "submitting to God"? This is not valid in the case of its translation (submitter), because it could be used in different contexts. That's what God meant by "It is Him who named you muslims". I believe, therefore, this word may not be translated, and be has to be treated as proper name.
Another view
Aymen made a good observation, that there must have been another word said to Abraham with the same meaning. Perhaps it had the same semantic charactter as "muslims", i.e. it could not be used in a different context.Therefore, if we are to translate the word "muslim", it must be into another word that could not be used in any other context than to God (submitter to God),for example; not just (submitter).
Linguistically proper names are not translated. We all agree that there is no way that the followers of Abraham were given an Arabic proper name from the future before the language was invented. So linguistically speaking it is definitely not a proper name but is a common noun.
Now the issue that you bring is a philosophical issue not a linguistic one. Your issue is can you use this "grammatical construction" in a context where it does not have an underlying meaning of "submitting to God"? I would say that I believe that you can't. Everything in the heavens and the earth submit to The God willingly or unwillingly. So from a philosophical and practical point of view, all submission is ultimately to The God. The key is to do it willingly (as opposed to being forced to do it later unwillingly). So when you hear "submit!" or "did you submit?" without a "to whom" object (as we hear in the great reading 2130, 320, 4917, etc.), people who know the truth know that the "to whom" object is "the Lord of the universe". No one claims that the word "submit"/"aslim" is a proper name because this "grammatical construction" can or cannot be used in a context where it does not have an underlying meaning of "submitting to God".
Peace,
Ayman
-
Salam Aymen
I think Idid not explain my point clearly. In fact I never thought of this before, so this explains a bit of clumsiness.
What I want to say is that we have proper names, which should not be translated
And there are common nouns that should/can be translated
A third category, set by God, is "common names", i.e common nouns that behave like proper names, and can only be translated under a strict condition.When I say aslam can not be used in a different context, I mean in ordinary language, not a religious context. Can you think of an Arabic sentence where you may use this verb where it does not mean "aslam something lillah"? This is not valid for the verb "to submit". I can say I submitted my application to the human resources.
So, the "strict" condition to translate the "proper noun" or "common name" muslim is to translate it into a word that is not used (in the wide target language) in any other entity than to God. Otherwise, it should be a complete sentence (submitter to God) and not just (submitter).I hope this is clearer.
-
Peace Samia,
I think Idid not explain my point clearly. In fact I never thought of this before, so this explains a bit of clumsiness.
Sister, we are both trying to undo hundreds of years of confusion and corruption. Given the circumstances, a bit of clumsiness on my part or your part is inevitable and is a healthy thing.
What I want to say is that we have proper names, which should not be translated
And there are common nouns that should/can be translated
A third category, set by God, is "common names", i.e common nouns that behave like proper names, and can only be translated under a strict condition.I don't think that creating a new third previously unheard of category is the answer, especially since this category seems to have been created exclusively for terms perceived as "religious". Also, "set by God" is an unjustifiably strong statement.
When I say aslam can not be used in a different context, I mean in ordinary language, not a religious context. Can you think of an Arabic sentence where you may use this verb where it does not mean "aslam something lillah"?
You may be right from a Modern Arabic language perspective. However, what we are interested in is how a pre-quranic Arab hearing the word for the first time would have understood it.
I can think of several Arabic sentences in the great reading where aslam/muslim doesn't mean "aslam something lillah". Take 271 for example where the word "muslima/musalama" (female "muslim"/ a female who is made "muslim" is used in reference to the appearance of a cow!
This is not valid for the verb "to submit". I can say I submitted my application to the human resources.
The same thing can be said about "muslima/musalama" (female "muslim"/ a female who is made "muslim" in 271. So the English "submit/submitter" like the Arabic "aslam/muslim" can be used in different contexts in ordinary language. As in the case of all common nouns, the context is what determines the meaning in both cases. There is no need to assume that the reader is not intelligent enough to figure this out on his or her own and that we have to create a special category of "proper nouns" for whatever words religious people take as sacrosanct.
So, the "strict" condition to translate the "proper noun" or "common name" muslim is to translate it into a word that is not used (in the wide target language) in any other entity than to God. Otherwise, it should be a complete sentence (submitter to God) and not just (submitter).
I hope this is clearer.I think that the context determines what the meaning is and hence the proper translation. If the context can be translated, then so can the word in question. There is no need for a special treatment of "religious" words. If the word "submitter" doesn't sound right in the context then we need to look for another English word that is more appropriate instead of masking the issue by inventing a new category of nouns.
Peace,
Ayman