Author Topic: Muhammad Asad's 70:30  (Read 7986 times)

zigazigha

  • Beginner/Inquirer
  • *
  • Posts: 62
  • Karma +0/-0
Muhammad Asad's 70:30
« on: March 23, 2017, 01:00:49 PM »
Salam.
I know that this is probably a really stupid question but it's bothering me and I want to hear other opinions.

I was reading Muhammad Asad's The Message Of Quran and this is how he translated 70:29-30

"(those) who are mindful of their chastity,[not giving way to their desires] with any but their spouses - that is, those whom they rightfully possess [through wedlock] - : for then, behold, they are free of all blame"

In the comment he says the conjunction "aw" doesn't mean "or", but it has an explanatory function.

If this is the right translation does it mean that wives are possession of their husband? Isn't it degrading?

huruf

  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 6502
  • Karma +1/-1
Re: Muhammad Asad's 70:30
« Reply #1 on: March 23, 2017, 01:25:30 PM »
He has translated ma malakat aymanukum as an explanation of spouses and though I agree that in this case the wa is "or" not "and" I think he has made into too much trouble to make it assimilable to modern western thought.

Actually what is says "what your right hand possesses". Many people tend to forget the "right hand" and fix on the possess part forget the right hand part. But the right hand part is there for something. Right hand is there for good. Something in your right hand is something that you hold for good puprposes, to whom you commit to good. That is your right hand possessess de capacity to do good for those persons.

And something else, woen can also exercise right hand possession.


Salaam

Wakas

  • Administrator
  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 11319
  • Karma +14/-2
  • Gender: Male
Re: Muhammad Asad's 70:30
« Reply #2 on: March 23, 2017, 02:01:45 PM »
peace Meem noon,

I disagree. I consider Asad's translation to be one of the best. No translation is perfect however.
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

Bender

  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 2587
  • Karma +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Muhammad Asad's 70:30
« Reply #3 on: March 23, 2017, 02:09:13 PM »
I agree that in this case the wa is "or" not "and"
Why would you agree on 1 case "wa" to be "or"and not "and"?

btw there is no wa but an aw (assuming you are not talking about the start of 70:29).
Alhamdu lillahi rabbi al-alameen

Timotheus

  • Truth Seeker
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
  • Karma +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Muhammad Asad's 70:30
« Reply #4 on: March 23, 2017, 06:00:33 PM »
Peace

Aw او means or and introduces alternatives in the sense of..

I feel like a taco or two

As opposed to am ام which also means or but is used more in the sense of an opposed alternative rather than a friendly alternative, like

Is this for real or not?

 I gave up on translations, while for the main part they are generally straightforward, when it comes to such verses with legal rulings etc they sometimes distorted. I recommend learning Arabic, it's simple to learn, at least the Quran is.

What could i say that is better than what God has already informed us of?
Follow God
Seek His guidance, the only guidance
Glory and Praise be to God, rabbil Aalameen

good logic

  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 5553
  • Karma +7/-2
Re: Muhammad Asad's 70:30
« Reply #5 on: March 23, 2017, 11:40:15 PM »
Peace Wakas.
I disagree with you. Asad himself wrote:
As regards the style of my translation, I have consciously avoided using unnecessary archaisms, which would only tend to obscure the meaning of the Quran to the contemporary reader. On the other hand, I did not see any necessity of rendering Quranic phrases into a deliberately "modern" idiom, which would conflict with the spirit of the Arabic original and jar upon any ear attuned to the solemnity inherent in the concept of the revelation.
...although it is impossible to 'reproduce' the Qur'an as such in any other language, it is none the less possible to render its message comprehensible to people who, like most Westerners, do not know Arabic...well enough to find their way through it unaided?And I am fully aware that my rendering does not and could not really 'do justice' to the Qur'an and the layers upon layers of its meaning: for, 'if all the sea were ink for my Sustainer's words, the sea would indeed be exhausted ere my Sustainer's words are exhausted.' (Qur'an 18:109).


While all translations done through hard work and sincerity deserve recognition,I think it is a matter of "bias" with some to prefer certain translations that agree with their conceived"upbringing".
Also,quote:
No translation of the Holy Quran can truly reproduce the majesty of the Arabic original. There will always remain among readers a legitimate debate as to which translation comes closer to the meaning of Allah?s Words.

The best evidence for comparison( And you also ask for evidence and rightly so) is to put the translations verse to verse with each other and analyse "scientifically" and with an independent panel .Simply there will be no agreement . Or GOD would need to authorise a version and inspire/help... a"messenger" to come up with the best translation...Even then there will be no agreement.
Having said that ,you are entitled to your opinion.
GOD bless you.
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: 11319
  • Karma +14/-2
  • Gender: Male
Re: Muhammad Asad's 70:30
« Reply #6 on: March 24, 2017, 12:53:44 AM »
peace meem,

Please see
http://quranix.org/1
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

huruf

  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 6502
  • Karma +1/-1
Re: Muhammad Asad's 70:30
« Reply #7 on: March 24, 2017, 01:03:45 AM »
Why would you agree on 1 case "wa" to be "or"and not "and"?

btw there is no wa but an aw (assuming you are not talking about the start of 70:29).

There are common instances in the Qur'an where you have to understand wa as "or" or it would not make sense. I do not remember now a particular case. On the other hand there are other very convinient translations where an "or" would be much fitter, but it would go against some convenient translation as and which suits the preference of certain establishments.

In the case at hand the logical meanning is "or" unless we are really committed to the idea that God allows to have spouse and besides a few or many others arrengaments. You have one or the other, not both. Of course the trick is not merely in tranlation but in self serving reading of the original by its readers.

On the other hand it is grammatically quite correct. Conjunctions and prepositions do not automatically follow he most common or preferred meanig. Preposition 3alaa is translated systematically as over but many,many times, it is not that. Language usage is ignored in particuclar if it the over meaning suits some preconceived idea.

Salaam

huruf

  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 6502
  • Karma +1/-1
Re: Muhammad Asad's 70:30
« Reply #8 on: March 24, 2017, 01:20:03 AM »
Regarding translations in general, we must not forget that translators are human, that translating the Qur'an is a very ambitious endeavour and that the fact of undertaking it with the high aim of making thins easier for those interested is already in itself deserving of all praise and encouragement.
But what we cannot and should not expect from a translator is to make a translation as good as the original. It is unfair and it would be tyranical. They are nto God , they cannot, but we should take advatage of their effort not to reliefve us from making any effort but to help us to ake our own effort.

If something shocks us in the translated qur'an and makes us feel that we do not identify with something because it revolts our sense of justice or truth, then we should not let it go, whatever the translations says. Translations are improvable ALWAYS.

Regarding Asad, he did make a real effort and deserves praise. Perfect no way and we shoudl not expect that either. He did what he could, we shhould do what we can with his trnaslation or any other translation.

Translators are hhuman and along the trnaslation they get numbed with the job. I have seen that Asad for instance trnaslates to may taste quite properly the mamalakat... as what the rights possess in many places and then somewhere he ets carried away and trnaslates slaves... That obviously was a slip, involuntary, I should think. That should not lead us to disparage translators, but rather to assume our own responsibility of thinking and reflecting on each matter.

We must e thankful that there is an original text to which we can revert and try our best together with other interested and honest readers.

Always rememering that only the pure can "touch" the Qur'an. I have seen instances, not at all uncommon, of people who know no Arabic and had insights which were right on the spot when you examined them. That may be purity which made them see through all the noise and get to the real substance.

No doubt some translations are worse than others, even really bad, but without getting that deep, there many around which help us along. I think they deserve respect and thakfulness. They also deserve criticism for our own good, and for the translators satisfaction, since we ust take it that their aim was not to mislead but to help. They are huble servants just as we should be.

Salaam

Timotheus

  • Truth Seeker
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
  • Karma +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Muhammad Asad's 70:30
« Reply #9 on: March 24, 2017, 02:02:32 AM »
Peace,

If all of mankind and the Jinn gathered together to produce the like of the Quran they could not. Hence it is impossible to translate or reproduce, but you can derive a clear interpretation from most of it if you are sincere.

And on terms of wa and it's meaning و is a pictograph of a hook, or a stake/peg hence it ties things together, or secures them, hence it's usage

Much of Arabic still retains its Semitic influence from the pictographs, and often a study of the letters that make up the words can lead to a better understanding of their intended meaning

In English, a comma is more or less an accurate translation of wa, in terms of usage and meaning, but so is and. as you can hopefully see.
What could i say that is better than what God has already informed us of?
Follow God
Seek His guidance, the only guidance
Glory and Praise be to God, rabbil Aalameen