new article - Quranic terms defined

[Mazhar]

You claim to attach these words of praise to the mention of the name of Muahmmed based on 33:56 where Allah had sent him praise etc, lets not go into the grammatics of the words here, but thats basically it, and in your site in every place of Muhammed's name you have attached this phrase. 

Now in Quran there are umpteen verses telling you that Allah is the Most Exalted, Most everything, Highest of the High, it is clear that Allah IS the ONE and ONLY, but you attach NO words of praise to Him at each mention of HIS name, why is that?

Answer is in your quote and belief. You and majority of others never dispute the Sublime Exalted position of Allah, and the Exalted is built in the name Allah as you would see when we call and mention it in gramattical analysis of Ayat as لفظ الجلالة  and even for its states, Nominative, Accusative, Genitive, it is mentioned like this فاعل مرفوع للتعظيم بالضمة ; Exalted; the Greatness.

For the name of Messenger it is specifically mentioned since you and many others have reservations to accept his exalted position.

[Ayisha]

Answer is in your quote and belief. You and majority of others never dispute the Sublime Exalted position of Allah, and the Exalted is built in the name Allah as you would see when we call and mention it in gramattical analysis of Ayat as لفظ الجلالة  and even for its states, Nominative, Accusative, Genitive, it is mentioned like this فاعل مرفوع للتعظيم بالضمة ; Exalted; the Greatness.

I did ask you to consider someone that has never read Quran and is not Muslim, you have not. FYI and it is clear to anyone I have not 'disputed' the position of the messenger and am disputing why this particular phrase after the name of Muhammed and not after the name of Allah. It may be 'built into that name' of Allah as you claim, but not for someone thats never heard of Allah and also isn't it 'built into the name' of Muhammed 'the praised one' too? Now you are trying to justify praising Muhammed with this phrase and NOT praising Allah as you should with the excuse 'its built into the name', pretty disgusting from where i'm sitting.

For the name of Messenger it is specifically mentioned since you and many others have reservations to accept his exalted position.

Thank you for answering the post but it didn't answer my questions nor did you take it as anything other than me 'having reservations about accepting Muhammed's position', not that I expected any thought or a clear answer from you based on what i actually said and based on what I have seen here of your inability to actually see what people are trying to tell you and your refusal to translate the 'wa sallam' as asked given your translation of the verse. it is clear what your position is to those reading and it is also clear what mine is.

I will try to put into words what I have taken as Aymans stance on your translation, just for the record.

33.41-42 tell you to celebrate the blessings of Allah and to do this often, morning and night -   why have you not done this at every mention of HIS name?

33.43 tells you He sends (plural, imp verb) His blessing on YOU, meaning US (2nd person Plural) meaning MANKIND

33.53 tells you about going to see the prophet in his houseand how to behave, with respect which one should use going to anyone elses house. It tells you not to annoy the prophet but that he finds it hard to tell you that you are being annoying. Also how to show respect to his wives.

33.54 warns that Allah knows what you reveal or hide, this is related to above verse also

33.56 tells that Allah sent blessings on the prophet and that you should bless him also (accept that he is blessed and has a higher position than YOU) and show him respect, all relating to how to treat him and his wives and how to behave in his house
 
33.57 is relating again to those who annoy the prophet by not showing respect to him and his wives in his house



Your translation
"It is certain that Allah and His Angels send blessings upon the Distinctly Elevated and Chosen One [Muhammad Sal'lallaa'hoalaih'wa'salam]" (1) clearly a distinction here where there is none

"O you who declare to have accepted listen this imperative,

you people incline upon him with love and praising praying Allah for sending blessings, and you people submit to him salutations showing obeisance in a humble and respectful manner. [33:56] [Let us pay our respects and salutations and show obeisance to him in a humble and respectful manner. This will help us to elevate our selves and it will place us amongst those who recognize and acknowledge the elevated distinction and honour bestowed by Allah on him, and it will prove us to be unlike, and we will distinguish over selves from Iblees [and his brothers in this world] who refused to show obeisance to Adam whom Allah granted distinction and honour].

My understanding of this verse is that Allah sent blessings on the prophet and asks us to send blessings on him and greet him with respect, to show respect to him. Allah does not ask us to SUBMIT to him as we submit ONLY to Allah. It does not mean BOW to him as we bow only to Allah, to SHOW OBEISANCE is to BOW before someone superior. In your translation you are saying that 'Allah did this and says we should do that too' and your words are showing a meaning, by using submit and show obeisance, that Allah Himself showed obeisance and submitted to the prophet.

This seems to be the reason, imo, that you are avoiding translating the 'wa sallam' in salla allahu alaiyhi wa sallam

Ayman, if I have got it wrong what you are trying to show in your posts i would be grateful if you correct me please. I have just tried to put in my words what this whole translation looks like to me as I am native English speaker and this translation is an attempt at translating to English.


 

[ayman]

Peace Mazhar,

Arabic is neither my native language nor was it my subject in my studies and nor was it the language in my professional career. Nor I learnt it from any Madrassa or University. I learnt it only from Qur'aan, at my own, with the assistance of work done by hundreds of people about it.
I don't know why every time you expose yourself to be a greater fool than your previous post. The Ayat quoted above is a nominal sentence. The first word is the subject of the sentence and is evident from being in nominative case. And the word "عَلَّمَ" after it is the predicate of the subject and is a verbal sentence, with subject pronoun/doer of the verb built in, which is هُوَ, and in Arabic it is mentioned as "الفاعل ضمير مستتر فيه جوازا تقديره هُوَ". And in the end is the object of the verb in accusative state since object is always accusative. For this reason you will see my translation
He, Ar'Reh'maan taught the [Grand] Qur'aan.
PM  55:2 He has taught the Qur?an. {The subject of verb is Pronoun He-which refers back to the antecedent- Ar'Reh'maan. The Subject comes after the verb.

I see your problem. You memorized some theories but never applied them in day to day life. When the people of the prophet spoke Arabic they didn't think like you when they spoke to their kids at home or on the street and said for example "أنا أحبك" (I love you), they intuitively use SVO order without using any theories. The fact of the matter is that any Arabic speaker intuitively knows that "al-rahmaan" is the subject of the verb "taught". The subject by definition is simply who performed the action of the verb and this is certainly "al-rahmaan". Your foolish babbling not only demonstrates your ignorance of simple Arabic but also your ignorance of mundane concepts like subject-verb relationship and the inherent flexibility and fluidity in Arabic which allows SVO and VSO and even VOS order.

Since you are babbling theories without understanding them, it is not surprising that you cannot answer and are running like a coward from answering the following simple questions:

1. Povide a translation for your formula "salla allah alayh wa sallim".

2. Why you don't use the sectarian formula, which is "salla alla alayh wa sallam", and instead you made up your own formula?

If you don't want to continue to be seen as an idiot and a coward in the eyes of everyone on the forum and restore some credibility then I would suggest that you stop running like mad from those two simple questions and answer like a decent honest man.

Peace,

Ayman

[ayman]

Peace Ayisha,

This seems to be the reason, imo, that you are avoiding translating the 'wa sallam' in salla allahu alaiyhi wa sallam

Ayman, if I have got it wrong what you are trying to show in your posts i would be grateful if you correct me please. I have just tried to put in my words what this whole translation looks like to me as I am native English speaker and this translation is an attempt at translating to English.

You have hit the nail on its head.

Our friend Mazhar knows very well that according to his translation of 33:56, the sectarian expression "salla allah alayh wa sallam" is blasphemous and illogical.

I suspect this is why he invented his own ungrammatical but equally illogical formula "salla allah alayh wa sallim".

This is why he is refusing to translate either "salla allah alayh wa sallam" or "salla allah alayh wa sallim" and doesn't want to tell us why he disregarded the sectarian formula and invented his own.

Peace,

Ayman

[Mazhar]

Peace Ayisha,

You have hit the nail on its head.

Our friend Mazhar knows very well that according to his translation of 33:56, the sectarian expression "salla allah alayh wa sallam" is blasphemous and illogical.

I suspect this is why he invented his own ungrammatical but equally illogical formula "salla allah alayh wa sallim".

This is why he is refusing to translate either "salla allah alayh wa sallam" or "salla allah alayh wa sallim" and doesn't want to tell us why he disregarded the sectarian formula and invented his own.

Peace,

Ayman

She might not have noticed it that it has since been translated. But you are definitely a cheat who says that I have not translated it earlier. And I asked you in that connection that you even do not understand what will be effect when you put double "ll" with fatha on lam while the word is "و سلم" and I told you it is singular of "و سلموا".

I see your problem. You memorized some theories but never applied them in day to day life. When the people of the prophet spoke Arabic they didn't think like you when they spoke to their kids at home or on the street and said for example "أنا أحبك" (I love you), they intuitively use SVO order without using any theories. The fact of the matter is that any Arabic speaker intuitively knows that "al-rahmaan" is the subject of the verb "taught". The subject by definition is simply who performed the action of the verb and this is certainly "al-rahmaan".

How do you know that Arabs intitutively not knew that subject comes after the verb? And now you are trying by putting two Arabic words to demonstrate as if you know Arabic. Now put vowel signs on your word  "أنا أحبك" and then enlarge its size and again translate.

[Mazhar]

and said for example "أنا أحبك" (I love you), they intuitively use SVO order without using any theories.

And the place from where you have picked it up, he is suggesting SVO, only to indicate a nominal sentence structure. Basic principle of Arabic is this:
Nominal sentences are used when the SUBJECT is the most important element in the sentence and which the speaker seeks to emphasize.

Verbal sentences are in fact the normal tone, they are used when the speaker is not stressing anything in particular, or also when the speaker seeks to stress the verb or the ACTION.

[ayman]

Peace Mazhar,

She might not have noticed it that it has since been translated. But you are definitely a cheat who says that I have not translated it earlier. And I asked you in that connection that you even do not understand what will be effect when you put double "ll" with fatha on lam while the word is "و سلم" and I told you it is singular of "و سلموا".

As Ayisha pointed out, no one has seen your translation of your invented formula on this thread. All we have seen is that you are a coward who keeps evading because you know that translating your stupid invented formula will expose that it is nothing but mindless parroting of nonsense.

How do you know that Arabs intitutively not knew that subject comes after the verb? And now you are trying by putting two Arabic words to demonstrate as if you know Arabic. Now put vowel signs on your word  "أنا أحبك" and then enlarge its size and again translate.

What are you babbling about? This is the language I use everyday. Vocalization signs may be used to teach some of the foreigners who are not experienced enough or bright enough to figure the vocalization from the context. No intelligent Arab writes vocalization marks in the course of any regular writing. This is precisely why the early manuscripts of the great reading didn't have vocalization marks and yet we are able to read them just fine.

And the place from where you have picked it up, he is suggesting SVO, only to indicate a nominal sentence structure. Basic principle of Arabic is this:
Nominal sentences are used when the SUBJECT is the most important element in the sentence and which the speaker seeks to emphasize.
Verbal sentences are in fact the normal tone, they are used when the speaker is not stressing anything in particular, or also when the speaker seeks to stress the verb or the ACTION.

Of course you only admit the truth رغم انفك after being cornered. So now you admit to the fact that SVO order can be used in Arabic. Emphasis on subject or not, the issue is that you falsely said that there is no SVO order in Arabic period while there clearly is, as any Arab child knows. You haven't even reached the level of Arabic knowledge of an Arab child.

Peace,

Ayman

[Mazhar]

Aymen,

You are now exactly behaving like the one so called Arab till recently we had on forum. I indicated to you what is the difference between subject of the nominal sentence and subject of the verbal sentence. A word indicating verb is a complete sentence having verb and its subject is either built in or expressed separately after it. Subject in nominal sentence does not mean the subject of a verb. Wicki is not telling what you have perceived. He is talking about SVO a nominal sentence where the subject about whomm something is going to be told, as predicate can be a verbal sentence which comprises of verb, subject, object where object can be brought forward also, i.e. object, verb, subject.

[Zidane]

Peace Bro Zidane,

Here are my notes:

17:1 Glory be to the One who took His servant by night from al maSJD al haram / the sanctified/restricted implemented SJD to al maSJD al aqsa / the farthest/remote implemented SJD which We have blessed its surroundings that We may show him of Our signs. Indeed, He is the Listener, the Seer.
17:2 And We gave Moses the Scripture and We made it a guidance for the Children of Israel: "Choose no guardian besides Me."

If understood traditionally as a journey to Al Masjid Al Aqsa in Jerusalem by prophet Muhammad, it should be noted that it was not built at the time, thus has been explained away as referring to the area/site. Similarly, it is also debatable whether the traditional Al Masjid Al Haram was built at this time, or if it was it was in a rudimentary stage. However, it is clear from the verse itself the reason for this journey is to be shown some of God's signs/ayatin, implying receiving of revelation. It just so happens that the next verse, connected with "wa", discusses giving Moses the scripture. Further, it could be said "the farthest implemented SJD" would most likely be in the presence of God, and this domain is blessed, therfore seems to allude to the process involved in receiving revelation. It is also in the singular throughout.
It could thus be interpreted as: the journey of one's heart/mind/consciousness (possibly at night in one's dream or night vigil) from their present instituting of the acknowledgment or actioning of God's decrees (recall that this can be one's focus/qibla) to the farthest representation of this, i.e. in the presence of God resulting in realisation/receipt of divine guidance.

Also see 17:90-93 showing Muhammad cannot literally ascend into the heavens.

Interestingly, the traditional story does bear some similarities to the Quranic version, i.e. receiving of divine revelation/guidance, being in the "presence" of God/angels, Moses is present.

NB: angels~controllers, forces in control of certain functions/laws.

Peace and Thanks Bro Wakas - very interesting - this looks promising to make clear many verses - I'll try to study them again accordingly.

Peace and Blessings,
Zidane

[Mazhar]

What are you babbling about? This is the language I use everyday. Vocalization signs may be used to teach some of the foreigners who are not experienced enough or bright enough to figure the vocalization from the context. No intelligent Arab writes vocalization marks in the course of any regular writing. This is precisely why the early manuscripts of the great reading didn't have vocalization marks and yet we are able to read them just fine.

Here all are not Arabs, perhaps few. Why not you put the vowel signs? They are the basic part of Arabic language since shortest syllable comprises of a consonant and vowel. Forget about personal copies of Qur'aan people had for their personal record, no copy of Qur'aan worldover is published/printed for public use without vowels.