Author Topic: Quran translation discoveries using its internal logic/precision  (Read 1987 times)

Wakas

  • Administrator
  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 11285
  • Karma +14/-2
  • Gender: Male
peace all,

Sorry for the brevity, but is the info I came across:

It started with realising it is not "sparing" but "shaming" women/nisa in 2:49,7:127,141,14:6,28:4,40:25. See the word usage here:
http://corpus.quran.com/search.jsp?q=pos:v+(X)+root:Hyy
Quote
7:127,40:25 are not about the Israelites. The 2 verses speak of Firon's punishments inflicted on those around him in his assembly who believed in Musa's prophethood after he performed the miracles: their sons were slain and their women kept alive to serve Firon and those with him.
The verses say "We will slay their sons and spare/nastahyy their women/nisaa'ahum, and surely we are masters over them". "al-Istihya" means to wish someone to remain alive. The word also carries the meaning of indecency towards the women. It is clear from the verse, that are only concerned in mentioning the punishements, that Firon kept their women alive for himself, to humiliate their husbands who betrayed him.

The other verses 2:49,7:141,14:6,28:4 come in the context of the favors bestowed on the Israelites. The verses are a reminder of the cruel torments and abasements they endured under Firon; their sons were slain and, just like the men in Firon's assembly who became Muslims after witnessing Musa's miracles, their women were kept alive as a humiliation and abasement, to serve Firon and his people "And when We delivered you from Pharaoh's people, who subjected you/yasumunakum to severe torment, killing your sons and sparing/yastahyuna your women/nisaa'akum". "al-Istihya" carries the same meaning as in 7:127,40:25 and with "yasumunakum" the Quran stresses the severity of these torments that were "imposed" on them in addition to their state of slavery.

The "favor" of Firon, of sparing the Israelites' daughters has nothing to do in those verses because they speak only of the torments and humiliations they were inflicted with; their sons were slain and their women kept alive and taken by Firon and his people.

2:49"And when We delivered you from Firon?s people, who subjected you to severe torment, killing your sons and sparing your women"

2:49"And when We delivered you from Firon?s people, who subjected you to severe torment, killing your sons and sparing your women"

14:6"And when Musa said to his people: Call to mind Allah?s favor to you when He delivered you from Firon?s people, who subjected you to severe torment, and slew your sons and spared your women"

28:4"Surely Firon exalted himself in the land and made its people into parties, weakening one party from among them; he slaughtered their sons and let their women live"

Sparing the Israelites' daughters is not a "severe torment" nor can it be considered a "weakening/abasement" which is why it is not mentioned in those verses.

Your argument and those with you, fails on both counts:
- the linguistic absurdity of claiming that nisaa' means anything else than women
- the attempted parallel of the Quran account and the Biblical account

Then realising that Reformist Quran Translation likely has it wrong with 4:127, and it is not "mother of orphans" but rather "orphan women/nisa", and refers to when the guardian desires to marry his orphan nisa/women (who are now physically and mentally mature, see 4:6) then he cannot withhold/consume unjustly what is rightfully theirs, which includes their inheritance/dowries. In Classical Arabic, an orphan can be an adult woman without a father and unmarried, hence the usage, see: http://www.baheth.info/all.jsp?term=يتيم

يقال للمرأة يَتيمةٌ لا يزول عنها اسمُ اليُتْمِ أَبداً؛ وأَنشدوا: وينْكِح الأَرامِل اليَتامى وقال أَبو عبيدة: تُدْعى يتيمةً ما لم تَتزوج، فإِذا تَزوَّجت زال عنها اسمُ اليُتْم؛

Translation: a woman is referred to as an orphan and she never loses the title; and it has been said: "and orphan widows (re)marry" and Abu Ubaida said: a woman is called an orphan as long as she did not marry yet, and if she married, the title of orphanage is gone.


The verse could be referring to dower as well as inheritance, but interestingly if someone makes the argument, like some commentators/translators do, and say it means marrying "orphan girls" in 4:127, then it will contradict 4:6 as they are not to be given their wealth until they are physically and mentally mature!  Thus, the man/guardian would not be in the wrong by withholding, but he clearly is in 4:127! So the only option left without causing a contradiction is to say it is about giving dower only and not inheritance, but then they will have to explain why AQ mentions their orphan status, as this would be irrelevant. Also, dower is given upon marriage, not before. Not to mention 4:127 clearly implies this ruling is referring to something already existing in the writ/book, which of course is 4:6, hence once this is clarified, it goes onto remind us of the duties to weak children (masculine plural). This withholding of wealth and situation also links perfectly to 4:128, see my article on DaRaBa.


As we can see, the internal logic and precision clarifies without a doubt issues such as marriageable age, meaning of nisa/women, other words etc. AQ continues to amaze me.
All information in my posts is correct to the best of my knowledge only and thus should not be taken as a fact. One should seek knowledge and verify: 17:36, 20:114, 35:28, 49:6, 58:11. My articles

www.studyQuran.org

OPF

  • Guest
Re: Quran translation discoveries using its internal logic/precision
« Reply #1 on: March 06, 2010, 08:18:38 PM »
The quran is internally correct and so it is self-validating:

Quote
And this Quran is not such as could be forged by those besides Allah, but it is a verification of that which is before it and a clear explanation of the book, there is no doubt in it, from the Lord of the worlds.

Perfect example of this in action:

http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599954.0
Surah 65:6

Men are not allowed to hit women. 'idrib' is the word used in Arabic, which means 'to banish, to strike, to smite'. The root word is ?drb?, not 'wkz' for ?to strike? as in Surah 28:15.
As the Quran shows, when women are unwilling to submit to Allah we are to banish them, even divorce them if necessary. Surah 33:28, 66:5-6
Surah 65:6 ??and injure them not to straiten them.?

Nowhere in the Quran is there an example given of beating a woman. If you ever have a question, always return to the original Arabic.
"Those who listen to the word, then follow the best of it; those are they whom Allah has guided, and those it is who are the men of understanding." Surah 39:18

If a man beats a woman, a woman can give back as much as she was given.
"And if you take your turn, then retaliate with the like of that with which you were afflicted; but if you are patient, it will certainly be best for those who are patient." Surah 16:126

"So the good women are obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded.
And (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave
them alone in the beds and banish them. So if they obey you, seek not a way
against them." Surah 4:34

Peace.

People say the quran condones wife beating, that it is a disgusting book. Now if it condoned wife beating it would indeed be a disgusting book. In reality, it does not condone wife beating and it is a rather beautiful book.

Wakas

  • Administrator
  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 11285
  • Karma +14/-2
  • Gender: Male
Re: Quran translation discoveries using its internal logic/precision
« Reply #2 on: March 07, 2010, 09:46:44 AM »
Thanks for the commentary OPF. I recommend reading the primary link in the thread referenced. The understanding you referenced, whilst a theoretical possibility, and more befitting than physically striking, it is weak.
All information in my posts is correct to the best of my knowledge only and thus should not be taken as a fact. One should seek knowledge and verify: 17:36, 20:114, 35:28, 49:6, 58:11. My articles

www.studyQuran.org

Wakas

  • Administrator
  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 11285
  • Karma +14/-2
  • Gender: Male
All information in my posts is correct to the best of my knowledge only and thus should not be taken as a fact. One should seek knowledge and verify: 17:36, 20:114, 35:28, 49:6, 58:11. My articles

www.studyQuran.org

good logic

  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 5455
  • Karma +4/-1
Re: Quran translation discoveries using its internal logic/precision
« Reply #4 on: January 21, 2021, 07:12:07 AM »
Peace all.

This is where I am trying to go with my study ,GOD willing, only use Qoran to explain Qoran.
Qoran often clarifies meanings in other similar verses or gives a literal and abstract meaning both at the same time, or one or the other. But it never gives any contradictions between verses,never!
Context and logic are key in the search of meanings ,especially to words that have multiple meanings or verses that give weird stories if not in context.

Let me give one example from a multitude of issues  I had in my study of Qoran.
These are the verses of the story of Soloman in surah SAAd:
38:30-40
وَوَهَبنا لِداوۥدَ سُلَيمٰنَ نِعمَ العَبدُ إِنَّهُ أَوّابٌ

إِذ عُرِضَ عَلَيهِ بِالعَشِىِّ الصّٰفِنٰتُ الجِيادُ

فَقالَ إِنّى أَحبَبتُ حُبَّ الخَيرِ عَن ذِكرِ رَبّى حَتّىٰ تَوارَت بِالحِجابِ

رُدّوها عَلَىَّ فَطَفِقَ مَسحًا بِالسّوقِ وَالأَعناقِ

وَلَقَد فَتَنّا سُلَيمٰنَ وَأَلقَينا عَلىٰ كُرسِيِّهِ جَسَدًا ثُمَّ أَنابَ

قالَ رَبِّ اغفِر لى وَهَب لى مُلكًا لا يَنبَغى لِأَحَدٍ مِن بَعدى إِنَّكَ أَنتَ الوَهّابُ

فَسَخَّرنا لَهُ الرّيحَ تَجرى بِأَمرِهِ رُخاءً حَيثُ أَصابَ
...
I struggled with the popular explanation of these verses(summary)like:
Solomon  was devoted to GOD, and once was  preoccupied with his horses in the afternoon,he forgot the Asr prayer  and when it was too late and the sun gone down, he statred to repent,then got rid of his horses  by patting them  on the necks  to say his goodbye!!!

Try as I may,I never settled for this because of the following:
1-Sun never mentioned.
2-prayer of Asr never mentioned.
3- getting rid of horses never mentioned
The actual Arabic never says these three things.

Then contexts ,logic and other meanings possibilities led me to the following explanation( summary of each verse):
38:30. Solomon inherited David s kingdom. He was a devotee to GOD Alone.
38:31  The cavalierly-horses regiment- was brought to him for checking one afternoon.
38:32   He said  I like this great gift From GOD to remember  Him  by doing some good with them. While the cavalierly(  disappeared-trial to show him- behind a curtain of dust
38.33  On their return-by his order- he patted each  horse in turn- in recognition for their beauty and power?-
38:34  We have tried Solomon, on collapsing like a dead body on his chair- from the day of duty to the kingdom- Then by reflecting He repented praying
38 35  He said: GOD forgive me- (for not managing properly/not doing justice to the kingdom s responsibility)- and give me a kingdom  tailored for me -my capabilities- not others You are the giver /grantor.
38:35-40  GOD answered his prayer and helped him manage the kingdom by providing others and materials...etc.

Now I can see no issues with this story and makes perfect sense to me :
Solomon was devoted to GOD and wanted to do a good job and manage the kingdom with GOD s help. That is an honest and logical thing to do if you are really devoted to GOD.
Anyway thanks Wakas.
GOD bless you all.
Peace
TOTAL LOYALTY TO GOD ALONE.   IN GOD I TRUST
38:65″ Say:? I warn you; There is no other god beside GOD, the One, the Supreme.?
https://total-loyalty-to-god-alone.co.uk/

Wakas

  • Administrator
  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 11285
  • Karma +14/-2
  • Gender: Male
All information in my posts is correct to the best of my knowledge only and thus should not be taken as a fact. One should seek knowledge and verify: 17:36, 20:114, 35:28, 49:6, 58:11. My articles

www.studyQuran.org

nimnimak_11

  • Advanced Truth Seeker
  • ****
  • Posts: 1005
  • Karma +1/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Quran translation discoveries using its internal logic/precision
« Reply #6 on: January 21, 2021, 01:49:39 PM »
I know I definitely didn't agree with the reformist translation when I looked at corpus. Though I appreciate their efforts greatly, at times they have overstepped in translation. They have forced meaning in places that are not there in order to avoid meanings that they feel is at odds with their genuine sense of good. 4:127 is one of those verses.