Announcement

Collapse

Islam Guidelines

Theists only.

This forum is a debate area to discuss issues pertaining to Islam. This forum is generally for theists only, and is not the area for debate between atheists and theists. Non-theist may not post here without first obtaining permission from the moderator of this forum. Granting of such permission is subject to Moderator discretion - and may be revoked if the Moderator feels that the poster is not keeping with the spirit of the World Religions Department.



Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Simple Question

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by siam View Post
    The Arabic of the 1924 Cairo Quran and the 1985 Saudi Quran are the "Uthmani Codex" (the Saudi Quran uses the calligraphy of Uthman Taha)
    https://www.thenationalnews.com/uae/...quran-1.636600
    the 1924 Quran standardized/popularized a particular Qirat (reading)

    Tajweed falls under Qirat (reading) as this refers to the rules of enunciation.
    At the risk of citing Wikipedia

    Source: Qira'at


    In Islam, Qira'at (also Qirā'ah) (Arabic: قِراءة‎, lit. 'recitations or readings') are "the different linguistic, lexical, phonetic, morphological and syntactical forms permitted with reciting the Quran".[1] Differences between Qira'at are slight and include differences in stops,[Note 1] vowels,[Note 2] letters,[Note 3] andbut also sometimes entire words.[Note 4] (While called 'recitations or readings' or 'verbalizations', the Qira'at are not different ways of reading the same Quranic text, but (slightly) different texts of the Quran.[Note 5] They should not be confused with Tajwid, the rules of pronunciation, intonation, and caesuras of the Quran.)


    Source

    © Copyright Original Source



    Please pay particular attention to the last sentence

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View Post
      NOT true! The 1924 Cairo koran (and so the 1985 saudi one) are not Uthmani codex. But are actually Hafs and Asim's from Kufa, Iraq.

      Your reliance on journalists can be as deceptive and deceiving others by your shotgun knee jerk reply...
      I still wonder if siam understands this and is a practitioner of idtirar or taqqiya

      I'm always still in trouble again

      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        I still wonder if siam understands this and is a practitioner of idtirar or taqqiya

        I sometimes do wonder, too..

        Taqqiya is espoused in their Koran, anyway.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
          I still wonder if siam understands this and is a practitioner of idtirar or taqqiya
          S..O. P.

          Comment


          • #35
            I can understand that Arabic terms can be confusing. Sometimes, trying to explain the intricacies of one language in another language with a different grammar, rules and history/etymology can make matters even more confusing.
            English has roots in the Indo-European language family while Arabic is a Semitic language.

            ---Hafs an Asim--is a QIRAT (reading/recitation). Hafs an Asim are both names that link to a chain of transmitters leading to the Prophet(pbuh) himself. The Qirat uses the Uthmani Codex. There are no other Qurans in circulation/print today except the Uthmani Codex.

            ---Among the chain of transmitters of this particular Qirat is Ibn Masud. Whatever misunderstanding Ibn Masud may have had regarding the Quran---Matters were eventually cleared up because he was in the chain of transmitters of the Qirat (of the Uthamni Codex) that we are using today.


            (The Uthmani codex standardized the Ahruf (mode/dialect) not Qirat)
            Last edited by siam; 11-22-2020, 10:58 PM.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by siam View Post
              I can understand that Arabic terms can be confusing. Sometimes, trying to explain the intricacies of one language in another language with a different grammar, rules and history/etymology can make matters even more confusing.
              So is that why there are so many foreign loanwords in the qur'an? You know, in the book that Muslims insist was sent down entirely in Arabic because that is the language of Allah. Because it was too intricate?
              Last edited by rogue06; 11-23-2020, 07:06 AM.

              I'm always still in trouble again

              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                So is that why there are so many foreign loanwords in the qur'an? You know, in the book that Muslims insist was sent down entirely in Arabic because that is the language of Allah. Because it was too intricate?
                Actually "PERFECT" Arabic donnchaknoooo? Really!!!

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                  So is that why there are so many foreign loanwords in the qur'an? You know, in the book that Muslims insist was sent down entirely in Arabic because that is the language of Allah. Because it was too intricate?
                  There are several reasons for Arabic---but I will give the simple answer here.
                  The Quranic explanation for the use of Arabic is that this message(Quran) though it is meant for all humanity, the primary audience are the Arabs---hence it is in Arabic. The reason that the Arabs are the recipients of this message (Quran) is because 1) God made a promise with Prophet Abraham (pbuh) that his descendants would be guided and 2) the Arabs had not received guidance (revelation) before.

                  According to the dictionary---
                  https://www.dictionary.com/browse/language
                  Language = a body of words and the systems for their use common to a people who are of the same community or nation, the same geographical area, or the same cultural tradition

                  Therefore, What is considered "Arabic" and what is not, would be the decision of the community of speakers that use that "language"
                  for example, the English "language" has 900 Arabic words (or derivatives of Arabic)...However---no English speaking person would claim they are speaking Arabic---no, they are speaking English. Likewise Spanish has 3,000 Arabic words....yet it is not Arabic---it is Spanish.
                  Finnish (Language of Finland) is so closely related to Turkic that they are similar---however, the people of Finland insist they are speaking Finnish not Turkic. Likewise Turckic speaking peoples (such as those of the Volga region) insist they are not speaking Finnish.

                  In any case---important terms/words are often defined (or redefined) in the Quran itself so it is clear in what context the Quran is using these terms/words.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by siam View Post

                    There are several reasons for Arabic---but I will give the simple answer here.
                    The Quranic explanation for the use of Arabic is that this message(Quran) though it is meant for all humanity, the primary audience are the Arabs---hence it is in Arabic. The reason that the Arabs are the recipients of this message (Quran) is because 1) God made a promise with Prophet Abraham (pbuh) that his descendants would be guided and 2) the Arabs had not received guidance (revelation) before.

                    According to the dictionary---
                    https://www.dictionary.com/browse/language
                    Language = a body of words and the systems for their use common to a people who are of the same community or nation, the same geographical area, or the same cultural tradition

                    Therefore, What is considered "Arabic" and what is not, would be the decision of the community of speakers that use that "language"
                    for example, the English "language" has 900 Arabic words (or derivatives of Arabic)...However---no English speaking person would claim they are speaking Arabic---no, they are speaking English. Likewise Spanish has 3,000 Arabic words....yet it is not Arabic---it is Spanish.
                    Finnish (Language of Finland) is so closely related to Turkic that they are similar---however, the people of Finland insist they are speaking Finnish not Turkic. Likewise Turckic speaking peoples (such as those of the Volga region) insist they are not speaking Finnish.

                    In any case---important terms/words are often defined (or redefined) in the Quran itself so it is clear in what context the Quran is using these terms/words.
                    It isn't just Arabic but rather the specific dialect that Muhammad spoke. This was why there has been so much effort by Muslims over the years to try to stick to that although they've had only very limited success.

                    And as I noted elsewhere

                    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post

                    Muhammad declared that Arabic is the divine language (that is it is the language of Allah) and proclaimed on numerous occasions that the qur'an was sent down in Arabic (surahs 12:2; 13:37; 39:28; 42:7; 46:127[1]), and surah 41:44 is often put forth by Muslims as evidence that there are no non-Arabic words contained within the qur'an.

                    But the fact is that there are many foreign words and phrases that are used in the qur'an -- some of which have no Arabic equivalent, and others that do. For example the Egyptian word for king, "Pharaoh," is used used nearly 50 times and the Accadian word for garden, "Eden" (which does have an Arabic equivalent -- "Janna"), is used something like two dozen times.

                    Other words that have been borrowed from foreign languages include Assyrian (Abraham or Ibrahim, with an Arabic equivalent in "Abu Raheem), Aramaic, Greek, Persian, Syriac, Hebrew, and Christian Ethiopic. All in all there are something like 270 foreign loanwords to be found in that so-called perfect Arabic document

                    So why are these words borrowed? Why are these words from other languages found in the supposedly pure Arabic qur'an? Was Allah unable to sufficiently express himself in the perfect language of Arabic?

                    Muslim scholars have sought to explain away this inconsistency by claiming, like the Arab philologist, lexicographer and founder of tajwid (rules for the correct pronunciation of words in the qur'an), Abu Ubaid al-Qasim bin Salam c.770-838 A.D. did, that those words had been incorporated into Arabic and therefore are Arabic.

                    That would be like Americans claiming that the incalculable number of non-English words incorporated into our language aren't really foreign loanwords at all but instead are really English words. It also glosses over that many of these words already had Arabic equivalents like those in the examples provided above.



                    1. All in all there are something like 9 places in the qur'an where this claim is made


                    I'm always still in trouble again

                    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                      It isn't just Arabic but rather the specific dialect that Muhammad spoke.

                      If this is about the Quran---then it is not quite correct.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Nothing incorrect about that. Except your erroneous presumption siam. Uthman b.Affan commanded Zaid b. Thabits committee to re-write, redact and republish his new Koran in the Quraish dialect of muhd.

                        But the Hafs an Asim reading of Iraq was not in quraish at all. Being from Kufa, Iraq it is a different northern speech altogether. According to Muslim scholar Shady Nasser this Hafs & Asim qiraat text differed NOT just in reading style but also had different words, VOCABULARY and sentence structure from other readings.

                        WHAT were the mushafs and manuscripts that the Azhar scholars dumped into the river Nile? They were too happy to desecrate those.

                        So-called preservation of the Koran is the biggest lie and joke that Islam gifted to the world.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Am I the only one who finds it amusing that a scholar has the name "shady"?

                          I'm always still in trouble again

                          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View Post
                            Nothing incorrect about that. Except your erroneous presumption siam. Uthman b.Affan commanded Zaid b. Thabits committee to re-write, redact and republish his new Koran in the Quraish dialect of muhd.

                            But the Hafs an Asim reading of Iraq was not in quraish at all. Being from Kufa, Iraq it is a different northern speech altogether. According to Muslim scholar Shady Nasser this Hafs & Asim qiraat text differed NOT just in reading style but also had different words, VOCABULARY and sentence structure from other readings.

                            WHAT were the mushafs and manuscripts that the Azhar scholars dumped into the river Nile? They were too happy to desecrate those.

                            So-called preservation of the Koran is the biggest lie and joke that Islam gifted to the world.
                            The Saudi Arabian government routinely desecrates qur'ans -- primarily those brought in from other countries by the millions of visitors arriving for the hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca) every year. They have their qur'ans confiscated upon arrival since the government only allows qur'ans printed in Saudi Arabia and these books are unceremoniously shredded and pulped although a few get burned -- which is the only way that old worn out copies are supposed to be disposed. But these aren't just old and worn out copies and they've been behaving in this manner for a long time.

                            For instance, in an account of what took place in 1802 after Arab rebels led by members of the House of Saud under Muhammad bin Saud temporarily seized control of the Ta'if from the Ottomans, and published in "Advice for the Muslim" (edited by the Turkish scholar Huseyin Hilmi Işık):

                            The Wahhabis tore up the copies of the Qur'an al-karim and books of tafsir, hadith and other Islamic books other they took from libraries, mosques and houses, and threw them down on the ground. They made sandals from the gold-gilded leather covers of the Qur'an and other books and wore them on their filthy feet. There were verses of the Qur'an and other sacred writings on those leather covers. The pages of those valuable books thrown around were so numerous that there was no space to step in the streets of Taif. Although Ibn Shakban had ordered the looters not to tear up the copies of the Qur'an al-karim ...[They] tore up all the copies they found and stamped on them. Only three copies of the Qur'an were saved from the plunder of a major town, Taif.

                            I'm always still in trouble again

                            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              The house of Saud was one of many tribes on the Arabian peninsula. They got kicked out from their ruling area and wanted to get it back. So they joined hands with a particular type of "Wahabi" and apparently formed an army. They conquered some territory and this eventually resulted in British support (1916) which in turn led to the establishment of Saudi Arabia in 1932. The house of Saud and the Wahabis are partners each propping up the other. However, IMO, (Saudi) Wahabism might be more of an identity-based ideology rather than one of principles (ethics/morality) and as with ALL identity based movements---it needs an "enemy"/other. For the Wahabis, anyone (including other Muslims) who does not conform to their "way"---is the "other". Such a stance probably makes them super cautious of "other" ideas, thoughts, philosophies...etc...
                              Other identity-based groups/ideas such as the French Laicite, White Supremacist, Nationalists/Xenophobes...etc all need an "other" in order to establish their own "identity-markers"
                              The formation of identity-markers is necessary for modern "Nation-States" because different groups/tribes have to come together in order to form a cohesive group with a shared identity that marks them as "different" from the "other".

                              As explained before---Islamic ethical principles stem from the "first principle"---which is Tawheed (Unity) ---the opposite of which is Shirk (Division). The "first principle" of Shirk is called "Iblisi Logic" in which an arbitrary and illusory criteria is selected to declare superiority over another to cause division.
                              identity-markers are not "wrong" in essence---they are necessary structures for human relationships and diversity---however, these identity-markers need to be maintained under a system that recognizes and prioritizes the brotherhood of humanity/human family in order to respect the notion of the equal value of all humanity

                              (Islamic) "Purist" movements/ideologies use the idea that they are "more Pure" to the "real" Islam and therefore superior to others. Some of these groups were formed as anti-colonial movements so an "us vs them" identity-formation" may have been convenient---however, as I have shown---such ideas can easily fall into Shirk if mishandled or abused.
                              (...And indeed the "West" did support the abuse of the Wahabi/Purist movements in Afghanistan as "freedom fighters"-- eventually leading to what is sometimes called "blowback")

                              Outside of the Arabian peninsula (Central Asia, East, Far East, South East Asia...Africa?.....)--- historically, there as been much religio-ethnic diversity and also the spread of Islam often came about through Sufi ideas which support Pluralism and tolerance. The recent influence of these Purists forms/ideas is causing worrying social tensions and disturbances.
                              Last edited by siam; 11-28-2020, 12:42 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View Post
                                Nothing incorrect about that. Except your erroneous presumption siam. Uthman b.Affan commanded Zaid b. Thabits committee to re-write, redact and republish his new Koran in the Quraish dialect of muhd.

                                But the Hafs an Asim reading of Iraq was not in quraish at all. Being from Kufa, Iraq it is a different northern speech altogether. According to Muslim scholar Shady Nasser this Hafs & Asim qiraat text differed NOT just in reading style but also had different words, VOCABULARY and sentence structure from other readings.

                                WHAT were the mushafs and manuscripts that the Azhar scholars dumped into the river Nile? They were too happy to desecrate those.

                                So-called preservation of the Koran is the biggest lie and joke that Islam gifted to the world.
                                Trying to explain about an orange to someone who has never seen anything other than an apple is tricky...rather than clarity, it can cause confusion....but I will try to make one last attempt.....

                                From the Muslim perspective---There has always been only ONE Quran---there is no criteria such as "Uthmani codex"---only "Quran". The term Uthmani codex is used in our conversation only for the sake of clarity because you are a non-Muslim.

                                Semitic language is multi-dimensional. One scholar described the Quran as a cube or a polyhedron---there is only one polyhedron but it has different sides. Now imagine this polyhedron as rotating and it has different colored lights. What happened after the death of the Prophet is that the rotation of the polyhedron stopped. Because it is no longer rotating---the audience can see only some dimensions of the polyhedron. However, some multi-dimensionality of the Quran is still audible (Qirat/readings)---represented with the colored lights. As time progresses forward---some colors of the light reduce in intensity and others become more intense so that eventually the more intense colored lights are more visible (readings = audible). However, such "development" over time does not change the fact that there is only ONE polyhedron (Quran).

                                From the perspective of a scholar (Linguist, Philologist, Paleologist)---each dimension of a polyhedron is "different" and the detailed study and specificity of each "face"/dimension advances their particular type of knowledge. Because they are not looking at the polyhedron as a whole but studying individual "faces" their language/terms define differences for clarity and specificity. Such discourse can lead to the misunderstanding that such a person is talking about a different polyhedron altogether---instead of a different "face" of the SAME polyhedron.

                                I have doubts that what I said has clarified matters---so I will try to give an example---but understand that we are using 2 very different language systems so the examples in English language system cannot represent or be transferred to the Arabic language system.

                                In the English language system---gender terms are used---"he" is male and when an r is added it becomes "her" for female or when and s is added, it becomes "she" for female. In English common usage---the Moon is an "it", however, in lyrics for poetic usage, a Moon could be written as she/her or if some context or lyric composition required, the "s" or "r" could be dropped to gender the Moon as male. In terms of the song/lyrics itself such differences do not change anything---the song still conveys the same meaning---but from the perspective of a linguist/philologist---these "differences" are worthy of study...because that is what their field of scholarship requires of them.

                                The average Muslim is reading/eciting the Quran for religious purposes---NOT for the study of linguistics/philology/paleology.

                                My apologies if I have been unable to clarify matters---but at this point its the best I can do with a very complicated subject.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by rogue06, 11-13-2020, 09:15 AM
                                57 responses
                                492 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Working...
                                X