Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Users
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Free Minds Forum Icon
  1. Home
  2. General Issues / Questions
  3. General Issues / Questions
  4. A Quranist and Quran translation tampering QXP

A Quranist and Quran translation tampering QXP

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Issues / Questions
31 Posts 8 Posters 563 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • L Offline
    L Offline
    Leoxyz
    wrote on last edited by
    #4

    Peace,

    Dear Jankren, please read the preface before making such ignorant claims

    QXP is a Tasreef-based understanding of the Qur?an presented in contemporary English that is easy enough even for teenagers. It is not a literal translation.

    Tasreef is the Qur?anic process where verses in one part of the Qur?an explain or provide deeper understanding of the verses in other parts of the Book. Concisely, it means looking at the Qur?an in its Big Picture. The Qur?an,thus, lets us look at its terms and concepts from very diverse vantage points.This is how special care has been taken to explain every verse from within the Qur?an itself.

    The respected reader should expect to find ?The Qur?an As It Explains Itself?different from the prevalent translations and explanations because of the use of Tasreef and the Quraish dialect, and for rejecting extrinsic sources.

    The work although close to translation, is more of an understanding from within the Qur?an itself. This Divine Writ calls itself An-Noor (the Light) and light needs no extrinsic sources to show itself. Therefore, I have based my presentation on two principles

    Focusing on the language in which the Qur?an was revealed.
    Making use of Tasreef, that is, how the Qur?an repeats its messages from very diverse vantage points.
    A diligent study of the Book using Tasreef helps us look at the Qur?an in its Big Picture, and this method gives us a phenomenal advantage toward its understanding.

    Does tasreef allow one to tamper the translation and commit "Tahreef bil Mahna"
    The Holy Quran warned us

    (446) Among those who have become Jews ,there are some who alter the words from their context,

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • U Offline
      U Offline
      unknownuser
      wrote on last edited by
      #5

      ^

      If you are correct, then I would advise that people be mindful of 378 also.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • L Offline
        L Offline
        Leoxyz
        wrote on last edited by
        #6

        ^

        If you are correct, then I would advise that people be mindful of 378 also.

        Thanks a lot that you agreed to my point of viewThe aya referred by you
        378
        (37 And there is a party among them who twist their tongues while reciting the Book to make you think that it is part of the Book when in fact it is not. They say 'It is from Allah', when in fact it is not from Allah. They falsely fix a lie upon Allah, and do so wittingly.

        This is what I am saying "Tahreef" in Holy books is a crime

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • T Offline
          T Offline
          Tay
          wrote on last edited by
          #7

          Peace,

          It might be relevant if the text claimed itself to be a translation. Fortunately for the authors, it does not. Please refrain from baseless accusations, particularly in thread titles.

          Peace,
          Tay

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • L Offline
            L Offline
            Leoxyz
            wrote on last edited by
            #8

            Peace,

            It might be relevant if the text claimed itself to be a translation. Fortunately for the authors, it does not. Please refrain from baseless accusations, particularly in thread titles.

            Peace,
            Tay

            Dear Brother
            How can you call it as "accusation".I provided the proof.
            Accusation is when it is false.
            What I have pointed out if this is wrong,I will apologize to the author and all of you.
            But first prove that author's translation is correct.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • WakasW Offline
              WakasW Offline
              Wakas
              wrote on last edited by
              #9

              But first prove that author's translation is correct.

              That is the point - it is not a translation. More correctly, you should say "prove that author's interpretation/explanation is correct". For this, you'd have to ask the author, who as far as I'm aware is not a member of the forum, so asking here is pointless. His email is on the ourbeacon.com site.

              All information is correct to the best of my knowledge only and thus should not be taken as a fact. One should always seek knowledge and verify for themselves when possible: 17:36, 20:114, 35:28, 49:6, 58:11.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • L Offline
                L Offline
                Leoxyz
                wrote on last edited by
                #10

                That is the point - it is not a translation. More correctly, you should say "prove that author's interpretation/explanation is correct". For this, you'd have to ask the author, who as far as I'm aware is not a member of the forum, so asking here is pointless. His email is on the ourbeacon.com site.

                Dear Waqas
                I do not want to know why he has done.This is expected.I just to let the readers know what is there.
                Don't you bash the traditionlist interpretation ?
                If not aware read whole of Literature by G.A Perwez.
                The Holy Quran says
                613
                Is this not so??

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • A Offline
                  A Offline
                  arnoldyasin
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #11

                  Salaam Aleikum,

                  AKUM vs IKUM - Wudhu

                  Posted By Dr. Shabbir - Florida
                  Date Tuesday, 28 November 2006, at 408 a.m.

                  Email

                  56 O You who have chosen to be graced with belief! When you congregate for Salat, wash your faces and your forearms, hands to the elbows. Lightly rub your heads and your feet to the ankles. ---.

                  "56. Ya ayyuha allatheena amanoo itha qumtum ila alssalati faighsiloo wujoohakum waaydiyakum ila almarafiqi waimsahoo biruoosikum waarjulakum ila alkaAAbayni

                  ****faighsiloo wujoohakum = wash your faces,(notice the end of the word ..akum)

                  ****waimsahoo biruoosikum = wipe your head,(notice the end of the word ..ikum)

                  ****waarjulakum = and your feet ,(notice the end of the word ..akum)

                  Because the word waarjulakum is written with .....lakum, it follows the washing of the face.....lakum, grammatically.

                  For the feet to follow the wiping of the head it should have been writttten as waarjulikum , that is .....likum and NOT ....lakum as it is in the verse."

                  I have discussed this with several arabic speaking persons, and most confirm the verse says 'rub your head and feet'. But still i would like to understand the above better.

                  • A questioner

                  Answer

                  IKUM and AKUM are not grammatically important here.

                  KUM is sufficient (YOUR in plural). The flow of the verse here means 'wipe your feet'. Shias are right here but for the wrong reason.

                  The Sunnis write AKUM.

                  The Shias write IKUM from the so-called non-existent QIR'AT IBN 'ABBAS (Abdullah bin Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib.)

                  Hazrat Abdullah bin Abbas was the son of the exalted prophet's paternal uncle, Hazrat Abbas). How could the prophet's cousin have a different copy of the Qur'an.

                  Interestingly, through the same non-existent QIR'AT IBN 'ABBAS, the Shias bring support for MUT'AH (temporary marriage.) They maintain that that QIR'AT said, "Marry women ILA AJALIM-MUSAMMA" (Marry women for an appointed or pre-determined time).

                  Allah says in 2231 - DO NOT MAKE ALLAH'S VERSES A LAUGHING STOCK.

                  You know QIR'AT means a way of reciting and not writing.

                  I hope, I am clear.

                  -SA

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • T Offline
                    T Offline
                    Tay
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #12

                    Peace Leoxyz,

                    How can you call it as "accusation".I provided the proof.

                    The accusation that the translation is "tampering" the quran is baseless because the text you are quoting from is not a translation. The text, called QXP, is self-described as "more of an understanding from within the Qur?an itself" as Arnold quoted for you in the preface. Thus, any and all criticism regarding it's worthiness as a translation is completely irrelevant.

                    The authors clearly went to great lengths to explain their goals and probably to avoid this very type of misunderstanding. I would suggest reading the preface again to better grasp this.

                    Peace,
                    Tay

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • U Offline
                      U Offline
                      unknownuser
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #13

                      Would it be better called exegesis/tafseer?

                      By the way, there is a hadeeth about people nitpicking every single fault baselessly while ignoring themselves. I'll find it, God willing.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • L Offline
                        L Offline
                        Leoxyz
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #14

                        Peace Leoxyz,

                        The accusation that the translation is "tampering" the quran is baseless because the text you are quoting from is not a translation. The text, called QXP, is self-described as "more of an understanding from within the Qur?an itself" as Arnold quoted for you in the preface. Thus, any and all criticism regarding it's worthiness as a translation is completely irrelevant.

                        The authors clearly went to great lengths to explain their goals and probably to avoid this very type of misunderstanding. I would suggest reading the preface again to better grasp this.

                        Peace,
                        Tay

                        Which interpretation/tafseer of this aya signifies "rub the feet".??

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • T Offline
                          T Offline
                          Tay
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #15

                          Peace Leoxyz,

                          It appears Arnold has posted an email from one of the authors that addresses this very question.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • L Offline
                            L Offline
                            Leoxyz
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #16

                            Peace Leoxyz,

                            It appears Arnold has posted an email from one of the authors that addresses this very question.

                            Dear
                            Thanks for this info.
                            I am anxiously waiting for it.Because if my conception is wrong ,I will be extremely happy on its rectification.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • U Offline
                              U Offline
                              unknownuser
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #17

                              I hope you have booked your appointment. May I suggest that going through the NHS can get you a slight discount on the price of the frame.

                              Answer

                              IKUM and AKUM are not grammatically important here.

                              KUM is sufficient (YOUR in plural). The flow of the verse here means 'wipe your feet'. Shias are right here but for the wrong reason.

                              The Sunnis write AKUM.

                              The Shias write IKUM from the so-called non-existent QIR'AT IBN 'ABBAS (Abdullah bin Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib.)

                              Hazrat Abdullah bin Abbas was the son of the exalted prophet's paternal uncle, Hazrat Abbas). How could the prophet's cousin have a different copy of the Qur'an.

                              Interestingly, through the same non-existent QIR'AT IBN 'ABBAS, the Shias bring support for MUT'AH (temporary marriage.) They maintain that that QIR'AT said, "Marry women ILA AJALIM-MUSAMMA" (Marry women for an appointed or pre-determined time).

                              Allah says in 2231 - DO NOT MAKE ALLAH'S VERSES A LAUGHING STOCK.

                              You know QIR'AT means a way of reciting and not writing.

                              I hope, I am clear.

                              -SA

                              I also wonder what happened to Little Old Lady, did "her" proxy break down?

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • L Offline
                                L Offline
                                Leoxyz
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #18

                                I hope you have booked your appointment. May I suggest that going through the NHS can get you a slight discount on the price of the frame.

                                I also wonder what happened to Little Old Lady, did "her" proxy break down?

                                Dear '
                                Do not take the shelter of Weak and Fabricated "Hadiths" (what a pity taking shelter of Fabricated Hadiths and www.blablabla.)
                                My authority is Quran

                                Translate it and prove it .
                                The second source of this Quranic aya;
                                http//www.islamicity.com/MOSQUE/ARABICSCRIPT/AYAT/5/5_6.htm

                                In other words you are trying to tell me that Maazullah this Aya is not correct .
                                2156

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • S Offline
                                  S Offline
                                  Samia
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #19

                                  In other words you are trying to tell me that Maazullah this Aya is not correct .
                                  2156

                                  Salaam Leoxyz

                                  It's not about a verse being correct or incorrect. No one is saying it's incorrect. It's about vocalization of the word "arjulakum or arjulikum". If one adopts the fisrt one, and on mere grammatical grounds, it will follow wash your faces wujuuhakum", so it will mean wash your feet.

                                  On the other hand, if one adopts wa arjulikum", it will follow rub your heads ru'uusikum" and it will mean rub your feet.

                                  or

                                  And for your information, no one here messes with qur'aan, quite the opposite. If some people divide their efforts between the quraan and some twenty-hundreds other books, we concentrate ALL our efforts on the quraan. Keep an open mind and try to read more than talk.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • L Offline
                                    L Offline
                                    Leoxyz
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #20

                                    Salaam Leoxyz

                                    It's not about a verse being correct or incorrect. No one is saying it's incorrect. It's about vocalization of the word "arjulakum or arjulikum". If one adopts the fisrt one, and on mere grammatical grounds, it will follow wash your faces wujuuhakum", so it will mean wash your feet.

                                    On the other hand, if one adopts wa arjulikum", it will follow rub your heads ru'uusikum" and it will mean rub your feet.

                                    or

                                    And for your information, no one here messes with qur'aan, quite the opposite. If some people divide their efforts between the quraan and some twenty-hundreds other books, we concentrate ALL our efforts on the quraan. Keep an open mind and try to read more than talk.

                                    Dear Samia
                                    Thanks for reply
                                    Arabic is read and translated according to voweling (ihraab).
                                    according to illiterate people like me.Please correct if I am wrong.
                                    you have quoted two ayaas with two different vowelling.Only one is correct.Naturally both cannot be correct at the same time.

                                    Please give the correct Aya.Which one is correct??
                                    So according to you (the criteria of reading) if someone reads/writes the word ( ) as "aalimulghab or aalamulghab" per your arabic and Quranists's lingual somersault ,it does not make any difference.It is ok to pronounce and write both ways.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • L Offline
                                      L Offline
                                      Leoxyz
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #21

                                      Salaam Aleikum,

                                      AKUM vs IKUM - Wudhu

                                      Posted By Dr. Shabbir - Florida
                                      Date Tuesday, 28 November 2006, at 408 a.m.

                                      Email

                                      56 O You who have chosen to be graced with belief! When you congregate for Salat, wash your faces and your forearms, hands to the elbows. Lightly rub your heads and your feet to the ankles. ---.

                                      "56. Ya ayyuha allatheena amanoo itha qumtum ila alssalati faighsiloo wujoohakum waaydiyakum ila almarafiqi waimsahoo biruoosikum waarjulakum ila alkaAAbayni

                                      ****faighsiloo wujoohakum = wash your faces,(notice the end of the word ..akum)

                                      ****waimsahoo biruoosikum = wipe your head,(notice the end of the word ..ikum)

                                      ****waarjulakum = and your feet ,(notice the end of the word ..akum)

                                      Because the word waarjulakum is written with .....lakum, it follows the washing of the face.....lakum, grammatically.

                                      For the feet to follow the wiping of the head it should have been writttten as waarjulikum , that is .....likum and NOT ....lakum as it is in the verse."

                                      I have discussed this with several arabic speaking persons, and most confirm the verse says 'rub your head and feet'. But still i would like to understand the above better.

                                      • A questioner

                                      Answer

                                      IKUM and AKUM are not grammatically important here.

                                      KUM is sufficient (YOUR in plural). The flow of the verse here means 'wipe your feet'. Shias are right here but for the wrong reason.

                                      The Sunnis write AKUM.

                                      The Shias write IKUM from the so-called non-existent QIR'AT IBN 'ABBAS (Abdullah bin Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib.)

                                      Hazrat Abdullah bin Abbas was the son of the exalted prophet's paternal uncle, Hazrat Abbas). How could the prophet's cousin have a different copy of the Qur'an.

                                      Interestingly, through the same non-existent QIR'AT IBN 'ABBAS, the Shias bring support for MUT'AH (temporary marriage.) They maintain that that QIR'AT said, "Marry women ILA AJALIM-MUSAMMA" (Marry women for an appointed or pre-determined time).

                                      Allah says in 2231 - DO NOT MAKE ALLAH'S VERSES A LAUGHING STOCK.

                                      You know QIR'AT means a way of reciting and not writing.

                                      I hope, I am clear.

                                      -SA

                                      2156
                                      Uptill now I was in doubt that it might have happened by mistake.Now I am sure it was intentional.
                                      Thanks a lot for this post.I am going to save it for future reference.
                                      This shows such a big blunder because of lack knowledge of Arabic grammar I cannot express .
                                      Now see the actual Aya

                                      There are two verbs under discussion
                                      = (ghasala) without any preposition (harf-e- jarr)
                                      = (masaha) with preposition
                                      = is connected with the verbs by a conjunction ( Harf-e-ataf) (waw)
                                      Now the simple question is is object which verb (ghasala) or (masaha).
                                      If it had been object of Masaha then it would have taken the effect of Preposition because " aatif" "maatoof" (- ) are always similar in Ihrab and and it would have become "arjulikum".

                                      Since it has not taken the effect of the preposition (arjulakum), it means it is object of "ghasala" and not the object of Masaha.

                                      This is so fundamental factor of grammar so that if some person has read just a few chapters of arabic grammar ,he knows these thing.

                                      Example of "ataf on preposition"
                                      2285

                                      Reference Of Arabic Grammar'
                                      .
                                      ( &#1608 .

                                      .
                                      (&#1613 .
                                      (&#1608 (&#1608 .
                                      (&#1608 (&#1613 .
                                      Ref Sharah Ajroomiyya By Saleh Bin Muhammad bin Hasan

                                      If the standard of "scholars" is this what would happen to the followers.
                                      May Allah Bless our Quran

                                      (446) Among those who have become Jews ,there are some who alter the words from their context, *

                                      Is the Holy Quran based on Hearsay Grammar and Translation ????????

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • B Offline
                                        B Offline
                                        Bigmo
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #22

                                        Dear brother/sisters.
                                        QXP 2nd Edition 2005
                                        Author Shabbir Ahmed ,M.D (Florida)
                                        Actual Aya

                                        Further Reference
                                        http//www.islamicity.com/MOSQUE/ARABICSCRIPT/AYAT/5/5_6.htm
                                        Traslated by Shabbir Ahmed
                                        56 O You who have chosen to be graced with belief! When you congregate for Salat, wash you faces and your forearms ,hands to the elbows. Lightly rub you heads and your feet to the ankles

                                        I challenge to Prove this translation from the Quranic Text .
                                        Another Explicit example of Tanslation Tampering

                                        hail

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • S Offline
                                          S Offline
                                          Samia
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #23

                                          Dear Samia
                                          Only one is correct.Naturally both cannot be correct at the same time.

                                          Please give the correct Aya.Which one is correct??

                                          Sorry, I am not in a position to say which is correct, and I do not see why both cannot be correct. When it is cold, and I have no access to warm water, I would rub my feet; or if I am somewhere where the sink is too high for me, I can't just splash water on the floor, so I rub. Otherwise I wash them (washing is the default in my case). Perhaps God left it like that as a way of making things easy for us.

                                          So according to you (the criteria of reading) if someone reads/writes the word ( ) as "aalimulghab or aalamulghab" per your arabic and Quranists's lingual somersault ,it does not make any difference.It is ok to pronounce and write both ways.

                                          From the context, it is very clear where it is "3aalamulghaib" and where it is "3aalimul ghaib"., the first being (the world of the unseen) and the latter is (the Knower of the unseen). This is not a question of "tashkeel, vocalization"/grammar. these are two different words.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Users