Can it be proved that "Qiblatain" is an Arabic word?
-
If there are "worlds", why not two easts and two wests? In Arabic we use the expression "Easts and wests of earth". How I understand Mazhar's point is as such, if the qur'aan did not mention two easts or two wests, for example, this expression would not acceptable. In other words, the existance of an (odd) expression in the qur'aan gives it legitmacy; an odd expression that's not in the qur'aan is fabricated. {Samia}
No Sister,
That is not my standpoint. I merely say that a word is the one which has a known perception and fact on its back as its strength and genuineness. I never said that it is the Quran e Majeed which gives legitimacy to a word. There may be many many words which the Quran has not employed in its statements. Free-Minds may call and insist to accept that "Leoxyz" is a word but six billion people of the world are not going to accept the statement of Free Minds that it is a genuine word. And when we tell them that it is an identification name of a person on our forum they will accept it as name of a person. "Odd" is something subjective. Anything which is not in the knowledge of someone may seem odd to him though it is not odd for many others. The best thing to get out of "odd" feeling is to conduct enquiry and ask other people about it.
-
Interesting argument. I see what you mean (this argument is beyond my league in any case), that a word, to have an actual meaning instead of being a name, must have a fact backing it up. The problem is that words don't have to, because they are words.
Consider the phrase, in any language
"A number not describable in under 500 words" (thanks wiki ))
Is that phrase invalid?
-
The hinna here refers to alsamawaat alone or alsamawaat and al-qamar together being all inanimate objecs toghether they can be referred to as hinna. However if I wrote a book in Arabic speaking about an imaginary world with two suns, I would use shamsain. And that is fact. This conversations is, with all due respect, ridiculous. The Quran never mentions two suns however we can still say two suns in Arabic. It exists and every noun in Arabic can be dualized if we are talking about two of those nouns, supposedly or actually. Mazhar do you understand this? Must you persist in proclaiming the obviously illogical?
Godbless,
Anwar -
Interesting argument. I see what you mean (this argument is beyond my league in any case), that a word, to have an actual meaning instead of being a name, must have a fact backing it up. The problem is that words don't have to, because they are words.{OPF}
No, this is not the perception of my earlier post. If we tell people that "Leoxyz" is a name adopted by one of our members of the forum we are actually telling them that there is an object/person behind this word backing it with the sanctity of a fact. Brother Anwar on the one hand admits "imaginary world" where he imagines "two suns" and yet insists that "Shamsain" should be taken and accepted as a genuine and real word not imaginary. Can you digest it without being in a state of halluciation or intoxication?
-
Yes, but the purpose of language is to describe concepts, whether true or false. As for "two suns", it may be possible in this world. Two focal points is preposterous.
-
Yes, but the purpose of language is to describe concepts, whether true or false. As for "two suns", it may be possible in this world. Two focal points is preposterous.{OPF}
Brother OPF,
Don't you think there is inherent contradiction in what you have said? "it may be possible in this world" has the built in fear that it may not be possible. And if one claims that he is the follower of Quran, could it be considered becoming of him since Quran says do not pursue about which you do not have the knowedge. Why should a "Quranist" start presuming an imaginary world and presume two suns therein and coin a dual of "Shams" as "Shamsain"? If you consider two focal points as preposterous why not this idea too or atleast erroneous?
The debate is not about the truth or falseness of a concept behind a word. The debate is that there must be a concept and fact whether false or true behind a word to give it sanctity. We know that it is false yet it is a concept that is why there is a dual of Ilaha as Illahain. We may not find the word "Leoxyz" in all the languages/dictionaries of the world yet you and me take it as a genuine word only because we know on the back of it there is a person whom we know by his posts and thoughts.
-
"Two focal points is preposterous."
Preposterous for who? For those who believe in it? Isn't the idea of a man being equal to God also preposterous? Of course it is but that does not negate the grammar of a sentence that says this.
Mazhar,
The debate is not about the truth or falseness of a concept behind a word.
But this is the crux of your argument.
Why should a "Quranist" start presuming an imaginary world and presume two suns therein and coin a dual of "Shams" as "Shamsain"?
See, you don't agree with Shamsain becuase you think it is imaginary, i.e. a false concept. Do you not even know what you are saying?
The debate is that there must be a concept and fact whether false or true behind a word to give it sanctity.
I don't agree with what you are saying, but the concpet (true or false) that you are looking for behind the word qiblatain is that the Sunnis believe in two qiblahs, in two focal points, in two places of pilgrimage, in two places to direct one's prayer. They believe this, just as Trinitarians believe Jesus is god. It is a false concept, albeit it is a concept and therefore you cannot say that a word does not exist just because you don't agree with the concept. There can be thousands of qiblats, each person having his own. And this is not even imaginary, as every religion and person has a place that he convenes on.
You are contradicting yourself Mazhar and proving yourself very, very, very unwise in this debate. The fact that you have continued it for so long is proof of that. The concept of qiblatain IS something that some Sunnis believe in. They believe that there does exist qiblatain so this answers your question for where is the concept. Now whether it is true or not according to the Quran well that is on them. If this is where Sunnis have convened on and they view these places as valid for that then they are qiblatain, qiblatain for these Sunnis.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace,
You know what? I just thought about it and that will be my last post. Whoever can continue this argument will do so only in vain. Those who don't know Arabic well enough and are willing to accept any falsehood will eat up anything, anyway, no matter how ridiculous it is.
I think it is Probverbs that says 'A fool will scorn the wisdom of your words.' Whoever is mad that I quoted the Bible here well, mootoo fee ghaithikum, but I think that alrushdu (good & true guidance) has already tabayyana min al-ghayyi (been made distinct from error) here. All of you decide with God and truth in your hearts. I'm going to move on.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Dear Anwar,
I am sorry to say that today you have also adopted the approach of a traditional Maulvi. And let me tell you now that what you said about Sunnis is also wrong, you know little about sunnis. Let Leoxyz take care of that. The problem with you is that you read something thing here and there and presume to have obtained indepth knowledge about something. You yourself say "imaginary world" and imaginary "two suns" and then coin dual "Shamsain" and forcfully stress that it should be accepted as genuine since it has been coined/stated by a person who has authored a book in Arabic "Imaginary world". And also throw a marvelous idea that "Alqamar" includes everything.
Kindly study first how a word takes birth. Word is not the slaive of the mouth that it should keep secreting. Please dont jeopardize the sanctity of the words by just knowing one system that by adding such particles it will become dual and plural.