A Problem of Translation of Quranic Aya for Quranists
-
Peace Leo,
Just to be clear, I do not have any "experts", nor is there any leadership, nor following. Most here use multiple translations among other study tools. By no means is there any one translation or scholar that is even preferred.
My own defending of QXP was nothing more than pointing out to you that your attempt to deconstruct it as a translation was in vein since it is not a translation - something you've yet to acknowledge.
As far as ignorance, there is no shame in it. The shame lies with those who point to it as a weakness without offering any sort of enlightenment. It seems you are willing to share your own knowledge - that's commendable. We're all students, afterall.
Peace,
Tay -
Peace Leo,
As far as ignorance, there is no shame in it. The shame lies with those who point to it as a weakness without offering any sort of enlightenment. It seems you are willing to share your own knowledge - that's commendable. We're all students, afterall.
Peace,
TayThat is true.In ignorance there must not be shame.But there is a difference
1The question what sort of ignorance .If you multiply 2x2=6 .then do you think it is expectable from you.Yes it is acceptable from 6yr old child not from you
2The questionare pointed out the mistake ,but that gentlman instead of rectifying it and admitting ,he insisted with wrong argument.What does it show? Is this attitude of a scholar?.
I know many scholars who comitted some mistake but when pointed out ,they not only admitted but rectified also.
Honestly speaking it was just one example.I pointed out exactly same type of mistake in his book "criminals of islam" and with reference.Instead of defending his position with some valid argument or admitting it ,he got annoyed .He e-mailed me three times saying '" I know arabic ,I know arabic "
That was the only argument he had. -
That is true.In ignorance there must not be shame.But there is a difference
1The question what sort of ignorance .If you multiply 2x2=6 .then do you think it is expectable from you.Yes it is acceptable from 6yr old child not from you
2The questionare pointed out the mistake ,but that gentlman instead of rectifying it and admitting ,he insisted with wrong argument.What does it show? Is this attitude of a scholar?.
I know many scholars who comitted some mistake but when pointed out ,they not only admitted but rectified also.
Honestly speaking it was just one example.Good thing you are not a scholar because you are also guilty of tahreef bil mahna.
-
Good thing you are not a scholar because you are also guilty of tahreef bil mahna.
Dear Brother
It is true I am not a scholar.you may think I might have comitted tahreef bil mana but what Quran ? or that of your Guru ?But I am sure I do not know and it must be because of lack of knowledge for which I am ashamed to Almighty Allah -
By pure intention. I will follow Occam's razor and attribute it to ignorance on your part, however. May I suggest memory enhancing pills, they are currently very cheap at pharmacies. Pupils take them to boost their exam results.
Here is your beloved reference
Dear Brother
This is another Quranic verdict(464) (And tell them that) We never sent a Messenger but that he should be obeyed by the leave of Allah.
There are three roles of the Prohphet
1Reciting the verses
2Teaching the book and the philosophy of the Deen
3urifying the souls.Please underline the word "prophet"/nabi in the aya.
Also, please provide reference where "prophet"(PBUH) is described as "holy". Also please provide reference where it is used in the singular/definitive only instead of generic/indefinite.
More to follow.
-
Peace Leo,
Honestly, I'm not sure how or why you continually associate QXP or Dr. Shabbir Ahmed with this website. He's not here to defend himself nor is anyone here his ambassador. If you have a criticism of myself or anyone else here, then please share it and I'm sure the concerns will be adddressed.
Peace,
Tay -
Peace Leo,
Honestly, I'm not sure how or why you continually associate QXP or Dr. Shabbir Ahmed with this website. He's not here to defend himself nor is anyone here his ambassador. If you have a criticism of myself or anyone else here, then please share it and I'm sure the concerns will be adddressed.
Peace,
TayI do not criticize in person.I have never met him.
I repect G.A perwez.Reason ? I learnt a lot from him.If I see he was first teacher towards understanding Islam ,it will not be wrong.I was his fan.But when I started studying a little bit arabic and started consulted dictionaries myself ,then I came to know certain interpretation flaws.(It does not I have command on the subject which I wish I would have)
But I have never found him to be doing grammatical mistakes.
I myself is not very much in favor of traditionalists.But I hate to commit intellectual dishonesty.
This is what I find repeatedly.If some Tom ,Dick ,Harry commits such blunder ,it is acceptable but not from a person who is educated MD and claims to be Arabic expert.
I have no personal grudge but adopted modus operandi is against the philosophy of G.A Perwaiz.
E.G.
All of you talk against narrations.But I am sure none of you have studied "science of Hadith".What you people have read only that literature which was especially framed to take away the muslims from "Sunna"
Even Pervaiz while writing his books and even Tafseer (Mataalib /mafhoo) he took experts from history mainly from Bible and other historians and non muslim authors and included many narrations from Hadith books in his
Shahkaar-e-Risaalat
Mehraj-e-Insaaniyyat
Don't you think it is contradiction between saying /preaching and action.
Where-ever you like that narration is correct
Where ever you like that narration is wrong
Why ? So your own will /wishes are the criteria not some other standard parameters.
Hope it helps -
Peace Leo,
Hope it helps
I was hoping also. But I just can't seem to get you to understand that neither Parwez, nor QXP, nor Iqbal, nor George Clooney have a fan-club here. We are simply an assembly of people exchanging thoughts on islam based on the quran-alone.
We have no doctrine, we have no leadership, we have no favorites. The only thing that makes us a "we" is the fact that we're all here chatting in cyberspace and most of us believe in God.
Is it that difficult to grasp?
Peace,
Tay -
Peace Leo,
I was hoping also. But I just can't seem to get you to understand that neither Parwez, nor QXP, nor Iqbal, nor George Clooney have a fan-club here. We are simply an assembly of people exchanging thoughts on islam based on the quran-alone.
We have no doctrine, we have no leadership, we have no favorites. The only thing that makes us a "we" is the fact that we're all here chatting in cyberspace and most of us believe in God.
Is it that difficult to grasp?
Peace,
TayDear
Are you ready to accept that Author of QXP tampered the translation of the Holy Quran ??
Are you ready to condemn the Quran translation tamperers as you people condemn Bukhari and other Muhadditheens?? -
Dear
Are you ready to accept that Author of QXP tampered the translation of the Holy Quran ??
Are you ready to condemn the Quran translation tamperers as you people condemn Bukhari and other Muhadditheens??http//www.independentliving.com/images/659120.jpg
Are you ready to add a pair of these to your shopping list?
-
Very well, if you wish to reject good advice.
-
Peace Leo,
Are you ready to accept that Author of QXP tampered the translation of the Holy Quran ??
Are you ready to condemn the Quran translation tamperers as you people condemn Bukhari and other Muhadditheens??I wonder if you would like me to also condemn spider monkeys for the inflated gas prices?
I'm at a loss, bro.May peace be upon you,
Tay -
Peace Leo,
I wonder if you would like me to also condemn spider monkeys for the inflated gas prices?
I'm at a loss, bro.May peace be upon you,
TayDear
I was expecting that you will never do it.
Then you say he is not your leader.
You are ready to condemn Bukhari then why not "Quran Tamperer"??
Is this love for Quran ??
This is Quranist 's attitude towards facts of life?? It is attitude which I saw scattered throughout their writings. -
Dear
I was expecting that you will never do it.
Then you say he is not your leader.
You are ready to condemn Bukhari then why not "Quran Tamperer"??
Is this love for Quran ??
This is Quranist 's attitude towards facts of life?? It is attitude which I saw scattered throughout their writings.Somehow I doubt that. Emphasis mine.
-
Peace Leo,
I've given up on this topic, but thought this may help in general
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perception
Perception
In psychology and the cognitive sciences, perception is the process of acquiring, interpreting, selecting, and organizing sensory information. It is a task far more complex than was imagined in the 1950s and 1960s, when it was proclaimed that building perceiving machines would take about a decade, but, needless to say, that is still very far from reality. The word perception comes from the Latin perception-, percepio, , meaning "receiving, collecting, action of taking possession, apprehension with the mind or senses." --OED.com. Methods of studying perception range from essentially biological or physiological approaches, through psychological approaches through the philosophy of mind and in empiricist epistemology, such as that of David Hume, John Locke, George Berkeley, or as in Merleau Ponty's affirmation of perception as the basis of all science and knowledge.
There are two basic theories of perception Passive Perception (PP) and Active Perception (PA). The passive perception (conceived by Ren? Descartes) is addressed in this article and could be surmised as the following sequence of events surrounding - > input (senses) - > processing (brain) - > output (re-action). Although still supported by mainstream philosophers, psychologists and neurologists, this theory is nowadays losing momentum. The theory of active perception has emerged from extensive research of sensory illusions with works of Professor Emeritus Richard L Gregory in a lead. This theory is increasingly gaining experimental support and could be surmised as dynamic relationship between ?description? (in the brain) < - > senses < - > surrounding.
Many cognitive psychologists hold that, as we move about in the world, we create a model of how the world works. That is, we sense the objective world, but our sensations map to percepts, and these percepts are provisional, in the same sense that scientific hypotheses are provisional (cf. in the scientific method). As we acquire new information, our percepts shift, thus solidifying the idea that perception is a matter of belief. Abraham Pais' biography refers to the 'esemplastic' nature of imagination. In the case of visual perception, some people can actually see the percept shift in their mind's eye. Others who are not picture thinkers, may not necessarily perceive the 'shape-shifting' as their world changes. The 'esemplastic' nature has been shown by experiment an ambiguous image has multiple interpretations on the perceptual level.
Just as one object can give rise to multiple percepts, so an object may fail to give rise to any percept at all if the percept has no grounding in a person's experience, the person may literally not perceive it.
This confusing ambiguity of perception is exploited in human technologies such as camouflage, and also in biological mimicry, for example by Peacock butterflies, whose wings bear eye markings that birds respond to as though they were the eyes of a dangerous predator. Perceptual ambiguity is not restricted to vision. For example, recent touch perception research (Robles-De-La-Torre & Hayward 2001) found that kinesthesia-based haptic perception strongly relies on the forces experienced during touch. This makes it possible to produce illusory touch percepts (see also the MIT Technology Review article The Cutting Edge of Haptics).
Cognitive theories of perception assume there is a poverty of stimulus. This (with reference to perception) is the claim that sensations are, by themselves, unable to provide a unique description of the world. Sensations require 'enriching', which is the role of the mental model. A different type of theory is the perceptual ecology approach of James J. Gibson. Gibson rejected the assumption of a poverty of stimulus by rejecting the notion that perception is based in sensations. Instead, he investigated what information is actually presented to the perceptual systems. He (and the psychologists who work within this paradigm) detailed how the world could be specified to a mobile, exploring organism via the lawful projection of information about the world into energy arrays. Specification is a 11 mapping of some aspect of the world into a perceptual array; given such a mapping, no enrichment is required and perception is direct.