U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Islam
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-30-2016, 08:30 PM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,590,726 times
Reputation: 461

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post
The Qur'an is in the form it was originally revealed in. Any attempt to change the pronunciation of even a single word would have been instantly noticed by the listeners. Each revelation was recited numerous times, enough times that many of the listeners memorized it.


The meaning of the words is what dictated the pronunciation. Part of the miracle is that it resulted in an easily recognized melodious tone. It is the only form of Arabic that can be understood by all Arabic speakers and the only form no one has been able to write even one original sentence in.

The rhythmic quality of the Qur'an (Tajweed) is what distinguishes Qur'anic Arabic from Arabic and gives a partial explanation as to why no one has been able to write an original phrase in it.

That is the point.
The sole purpose of maintaining rhyming and tone is to facilitate one to memorize.


However back to our contention; since Allah is all powerful I am sure Allah is morally bound and capable to generating a positive statement that will still maintain the rhyme and tone for 1:7.

The fault here is Allah came up with a 1:7 that stir the "us versus them" impulse, is divisive and full of negative emotions [wrath, anger] and negative elements directed at Jews and Christians as non-Muslims & disbelievers that present a potential subliminal disdain or 'hatred'.


I am very certain if it is really a God [all knowing, all wise, all moral, etc.] who wrote the Quran, such a God would never have presented an 1:7 that is evil laden is in the Quran.
I am very sure the Quran was authored by Muhammad himself or a group of men for their personal interests.




[/quote]It also must be noted that in Arabic the pronunciation of a word changes the meaning of the word. Without hearing the pronunciation of the Qur'an one can not translate it properly. I suspect that many inaccurate translations are the result of trying to translate from the written text. The rhythm is the result of the meaning. During my days of still discovering my vocation I was quite interested in linguistics. The Semitic language family (Phoenician, Hebrew, Aramaic and Arabic) is quite unique in that to be understood it has to be heard. One can not learn any of the Semitic languages through written transcripts. The Qur'an only has .less than 1,800 unique words in it's vocabulary, yet over 34,000 different meanings based upon how each word is pronounced. Any ayyat (line) in the Qur'an could have numerous meanings if read as a stand alone line without the Tajweed pronunciation.[/quote]I am familiar with the Philosophy of Linguistic and its principles in general.


In contrast to the Semitic language [re Arabic], note Sanskrit which is much more superior in conveying the concept plus the emotions and other elements within its word, sound and tone.


Despite the existing inherent limitations of language at present, humanity at present is in a position to overcome all the limitations with its extensive based of knowledge and technology. In addition the range of a human is very generic and restricted by the common inherent DNA [human nature].


I have challenged you before, show me what is in the Quran that is so difficult to understand for a person like me who has researched deeply into the Quran and has a very broad range of other knowledge.


In contrast I challenge any Muslims scholars to read the philosophy of Kant* [I have mastered it] and understand [and agree with] it thoroughly and precisely in the philosophical and spiritual sense. I am very sure all the Muslim scholars will not be able to understand [not necessary agree] Kant precisely because of their intellectual imprisonment by the rigid Quran.
* Kant is one of the greatest philosopher of all time
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-30-2016, 09:42 PM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,311,550 times
Reputation: 7407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Continuum View Post
That is the point.
The sole purpose of maintaining rhyming and tone is to facilitate one to memorize.


However back to our contention; since Allah is all powerful I am sure Allah is morally bound and capable to generating a positive statement that will still maintain the rhyme and tone for 1:7.

The fault here is Allah came up with a 1:7 that stir the "us versus them" impulse, is divisive and full of negative emotions [wrath, anger] and negative elements directed at Jews and Christians as non-Muslims & disbelievers that present a potential subliminal disdain or 'hatred'.


I am very certain if it is really a God [all knowing, all wise, all moral, etc.] who wrote the Quran, such a God would never have presented an 1:7 that is evil laden is in the Quran.
I am very sure the Quran was authored by Muhammad himself or a group of men for their personal interests.



It also must be noted that in Arabic the pronunciation of a word changes the meaning of the word. Without hearing the pronunciation of the Qur'an one can not translate it properly. I suspect that many inaccurate translations are the result of trying to translate from the written text. The rhythm is the result of the meaning. During my days of still discovering my vocation I was quite interested in linguistics. The Semitic language family (Phoenician, Hebrew, Aramaic and Arabic) is quite unique in that to be understood it has to be heard. One can not learn any of the Semitic languages through written transcripts. The Qur'an only has .less than 1,800 unique words in it's vocabulary, yet over 34,000 different meanings based upon how each word is pronounced. Any ayyat (line) in the Qur'an could have numerous meanings if read as a stand alone line without the Tajweed pronunciation.[/quote]I am familiar with the Philosophy of Linguistic and its principles in general.


In contrast to the Semitic language [re Arabic], note Sanskrit which is much more superior in conveying the concept plus the emotions and other elements within its word, sound and tone.


Despite the existing inherent limitations of language at present, humanity at present is in a position to overcome all the limitations with its extensive based of knowledge and technology. In addition the range of a human is very generic and restricted by the common inherent DNA [human nature].


I have challenged you before, show me what is in the Quran that is so difficult to understand for a person like me who has researched deeply into the Quran and has a very broad range of other knowledge.


In contrast I challenge any Muslims scholars to read the philosophy of Kant* [I have mastered it] and understand [and agree with] it thoroughly and precisely in the philosophical and spiritual sense. I am very sure all the Muslim scholars will not be able to understand [not necessary agree] Kant precisely because of their intellectual imprisonment by the rigid Quran.
* Kant is one of the greatest philosopher of all time[/quote]

Working backwards I am also a fan of Kant and Nietzsche One of my undergrad Professors Dr. Brian Kovacs who I took several philosophy courses courses under was somewhat of an influence on me. He did somewhat awaken my desire to learn languages as it was a requirement to understand German to take his classes as he insisted on teaching in German. I do not find anything in Kant's writings that contradicts Islam I am especially fond of his "Kritik der reinen Vernunft." (critique of pure reason)

As for

Quote:
I have challenged you before, show me what is in the Quran that is so difficult to understand for a person like me who has researched deeply into the Quran and has a very broad range of other knowledge.
the problem I find is probably related to translation issues. The abstract symbolism and metaphorical nature of the Semitic languages does not seem to carry over well into English translations. Especially in areas relating to time, or quantities. Numbers are not always specific in Arabic, they have subtle charecteristics such as numbers below 10 designate innocence and purity numbers above 40 designate wisdom . the numbers seven and nine are quite often used to denote purity 7 (sebaah) can also mean Holy (Sabath), pure or innocent. and 9 denotes prosperity, 9 (T'soud)does mean He/she prospered.

the English translations might catch much of the literal meaning but are missing how an Arabic speaker understands them.

While for 1:7
Quote:
The path of those whom Thou hast favored; Not (the path) of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray. - 1:7 (Picktall)
is a very good literal translation, but it does not catch the essence of the meaning of wala alddalleena ( word for word is : and no the Daleena)Picktalltranslates it as "Nor of those who go astray, but that misses the concept of daleen--daleena being the plural of daleen. al Daleen is not referring to any particular people it literally means "The wanderers" in reference to those that are seeking the path. If it was meant to desigtate a particular people it would end with the suffix un. Very, very few Arab speakers will come to the conclusion it is referring to Jews or Christians as those are specifically called "ahl alkitab" at some point in his life every Muslim will be a Daleen. We all fall off the path and wander.
__________________
When posting as a MOD my posts will be in red

No advertising, no copyrighted material, no personal attacks


MODERATOR OF: Buddhism: Judaism: Paganism:

When in doubt read the TOS MOD LIST FAQ's
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2016, 10:29 PM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,590,726 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post
Working backwards I am also a fan of Kant and Nietzsche One of my undergrad Professors Dr. Brian Kovacs who I took several philosophy courses courses under was somewhat of an influence on me. He did somewhat awaken my desire to learn languages as it was a requirement to understand German to take his classes as he insisted on teaching in German. I do not find anything in Kant's writings that contradicts Islam I am especially fond of his "Kritik der reinen Vernunft." (critique of pure reason)
Kant condemned organized religion like there is no tomorrow in his "Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason."
Kant had a very bad impression of Islam [he called it Mohammedan religion then]


Note a comment on the point;
First I cite Immanuel Kant who declared that Islam was not a moral religion,* but rather an “extortionist” religion.**


* See the first General Remarks, Par. 8.4, to Religion Within The Bounds Of Reason Alone.
** Ibid., 4th General Remarks, , Par. 7.3. My comment: an extortionist religion might still require a person to obey the moral law or face severe punishment (although this is not the case with Islam). But despite such emphasis on the moral law, the religion, as forced, would still be extortionist and thus immoral (potentially). Indeed extortion makes Islam more of a mob or Mafia religion.***
Kant Wesley Web Log » Converting To Islam?
Even if you have read the Critique of Pure Reason, I doubt you could have fully understood its central message. In addition Kant's main philosophy comprised 3 critical books and many other smaller articles, etc.
I note most who claim to be expert on Kant still missed out on certain critical issues and that is why there are various opposing camps of Kant's philosophy.


Quote:
As for

the problem I find is probably related to translation issues. The abstract symbolism and metaphorical nature of the Semitic languages does not seem to carry over well into English translations. Especially in areas relating to time, or quantities. Numbers are not always specific in Arabic, they have subtle charecteristics such as numbers below 10 designate innocence and purity numbers above 40 designate wisdom . the numbers seven and nine are quite often used to denote purity 7 (sebaah) can also mean Holy (Sabath), pure or innocent. and 9 denotes prosperity, 9 (T'soud)does mean He/she prospered.

the English translations might catch much of the literal meaning but are missing how an Arabic speaker understands them.

While for 1:7 is a very good literal translation, but it does not catch the essence of the meaning of wala alddalleena ( word for word is : and no the Daleena)Picktall translates it as "Nor of those who go astray, but that misses the concept of daleen--daleena being the plural of daleen. al Daleen is not referring to any particular people it literally means "The wanderers" in reference to those that are seeking the path. If it was meant to desigtate a particular people it would end with the suffix un. Very, very few Arab speakers will come to the conclusion it is referring to Jews or Christians as those are specifically called "ahl alkitab" at some point in his life every Muslim will be a Daleen. We all fall off the path and wander.
The term "wanderers' is not a significant issue in this case.


What is critical in 1:7 are the elements;


1. those who incur your [Allah's] wrath
2. those who went astray


It is the terms "wrath" and "astray" that lead to their implications of "Jews" and "Christians" respectively.


The anger, wrath, abhorrence of Allah against the Jews is all over the Quran. This is because they were accused of changing the text to exclude Muhammad as the prophesized messiah.
The "anger" against the Jews in 1:7 is that of Muhammad personally and not of Allah.
This anger is still active within the ethos of Islam and that is why there is so much issues of never ending hatred for the Jews by Muslims.


When such 'wrath' 'anger' 'rage' is expressed by the ultimate authority of Allah, it carry a lot of weights and influence on Muslims who rely on Allah for salvation from Hell.


As evident in the Quran, Muhammad was also very angry with the Christians who did not recognize him as the messiah as stated somewhere in the Bible.


The term "astray" refer to the Christianity's astraying in believing Jesus is son of God, etc.


This was why Hilali-Khan are so certain to include Jews and Christians in parenthesis within 1:7.


From my extensive objective reading of the Quran, I can also agree with Hilali-Khan as correct in their interpretations of 1:7.
I am certain those scholars who are most familiar with the Quran will feel the same, especially the evil prone ones who will definitely sense and feel the anger [of Muhammad] against the Jews, Christians and idolaters [Qureshi] when the read the Quran MANY times within their life.
In my research and analysis, I noted there were 3,400++ verses related to non-Muslims in a negative connotation of disdain, contempt, abhorrence, dehumanizing, various condemnations etc. These are summarized in one single statement within 1:7 and chapter 1.


You tell me where I am wrong with the above.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2016, 11:48 PM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,311,550 times
Reputation: 7407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Continuum View Post
Kant condemned organized religion like there is no tomorrow in his "Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason."
Kant had a very bad impression of Islam [he called it Mohammedan religion then]


Note a comment on the point;
First I cite Immanuel Kant who declared that Islam was not a moral religion,* but rather an “extortionist” religion.**


* See the first General Remarks, Par. 8.4, to Religion Within The Bounds Of Reason Alone.
** Ibid., 4th General Remarks, , Par. 7.3. My comment: an extortionist religion might still require a person to obey the moral law or face severe punishment (although this is not the case with Islam). But despite such emphasis on the moral law, the religion, as forced, would still be extortionist and thus immoral (potentially). Indeed extortion makes Islam more of a mob or Mafia religion.***
Kant Wesley Web Log » Converting To Islam?
Even if you have read the Critique of Pure Reason, I doubt you could have fully understood its central message. In addition Kant's main philosophy comprised 3 critical books and many other smaller articles, etc.
I note most who claim to be expert on Kant still missed out on certain critical issues and that is why there are various opposing camps of Kant's philosophy.


The term "wanderers' is not a significant issue in this case.


What is critical in 1:7 are the elements;


1. those who incur your [Allah's] wrath
2. those who went astray


It is the terms "wrath" and "astray" that lead to their implications of "Jews" and "Christians" respectively.


The anger, wrath, abhorrence of Allah against the Jews is all over the Quran. This is because they were accused of changing the text to exclude Muhammad as the prophesized messiah.
The "anger" against the Jews in 1:7 is that of Muhammad personally and not of Allah.
This anger is still active within the ethos of Islam and that is why there is so much issues of never ending hatred for the Jews by Muslims.


When such 'wrath' 'anger' 'rage' is expressed by the ultimate authority of Allah, it carry a lot of weights and influence on Muslims who rely on Allah for salvation from Hell.


As evident in the Quran, Muhammad was also very angry with the Christians who did not recognize him as the messiah as stated somewhere in the Bible.


The term "astray" refer to the Christianity's astraying in believing Jesus is son of God, etc.


This was why Hilali-Khan are so certain to include Jews and Christians in parenthesis within 1:7.


From my extensive objective reading of the Quran, I can also agree with Hilali-Khan as correct in their interpretations of 1:7.
I am certain those scholars who are most familiar with the Quran will feel the same, especially the evil prone ones who will definitely sense and feel the anger [of Muhammad] against the Jews, Christians and idolaters [Qureshi] when the read the Quran MANY times within their life.
In my research and analysis, I noted there were 3,400++ verses related to non-Muslims in a negative connotation of disdain, contempt, abhorrence, dehumanizing, various condemnations etc. These are summarized in one single statement within 1:7 and chapter 1.


You tell me where I am wrong with the above.
I am aware Kant was against all religions and did have considerable hatred or disdain of Islam. but I do not find anything in his works that contradict Islam. I have no problem in agreeing with his philosophy.

the average Arabic reader is not going to understand Daleen as being "Those who have gone astray" nor understand almaghdoobi as meaning "Those who earn your wrath."

It is important to know that only a small percentage of the world's Muslims will read the Qur'an in English. Those that do are also aware that no translation is the Qur'an. I suspect that the majority of readers of the English translations are not Muslims. I am a little disappointed in the Hilali-Khan translation.
It reflects the wahabbi views of the al-Saud monarchy and is a rewrite passed off to the unknowing as being a Qur'an.

To know how most Muslims understand the Qur'an you have to find out how an Arabic speaker understands it. I do not know a single Arabic speaking Muslim who would understand the Qur'an as it is presented by Hilali-Khan

Quote:
Over the years we have published a number of articles on problematic Qur’an translations.

“On the ‘New Revised Edition’ of Yusuf Ali’s Qur’anic Translation by Imad-ad-Dean Ahmad, Ph.D. [1] which discussed the censorship of the commentary, removal of some appendices, evisceration of footnotes, added material, and the decision to “detranslate” the word “God” back into the Arabic “Allah” in this 1989 “New Revised Edition” by Amana.

In an interview with Prof. T.B. Irving by Sheila Musaji the sad history of how his commentary was not included in the published version of his translation was discussed. [2]

In the January 2002 issue of The American Muslim we published an article by Dr. Robert D. Crane ‘Playing Into the Hands of the Extremists?’ (Hilali Khan Qur’an Translation) discussed what is “Perhaps the most extremist translation ever made of the Qur’an”. [3]

We have also published many articles discussing translations, mis-translations, and different interpretations of particular verses. [4]

This Hilali-Khan interpretation of the Qur’an is still widely available in the U.S. - perhaps because so many free copies were given out by the case to mosques by the Saudis. It is also still given out to English speaking Hajjis at the end of the pilgrimage. I know this because I received one of these as a parting gift in 2005. You can still download this translation on the net, and it is still advertized for sale on many Muslim sites.

This “Interpretation of the Meanings of the Noble Qur’an in the English Language” published by Maktaba Dar-Us Salam in Riyadh (aka the Hilali-Khan translation) and given out so freely is shocking in its distortions of the message of the Qur’an and amounts to a rewrite not a translation.

The American Muslim (TAM)
__________________
When posting as a MOD my posts will be in red

No advertising, no copyrighted material, no personal attacks


MODERATOR OF: Buddhism: Judaism: Paganism:

When in doubt read the TOS MOD LIST FAQ's
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2016, 12:46 AM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,590,726 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post
I am aware Kant was against all religions and did have considerable hatred or disdain of Islam. but I do not find anything in his works that contradict Islam. I have no problem in agreeing with his philosophy.
Note in the Critique of Pure Reason [CPR], Kant demonstrated the transcendental idea of God is an illusion.


If you review the index of the CPR you will note the following sub-chapters;



Section3. The Arguments of Speculative Reason in Proof of
the Existence of a SupremeBeing .... 494


Section4. The Impossibility of an Ontological Proof of
the Existence of God... 500


Section5. The Impossibility of a Cosmological Proof of
the Existence of God...... 407


Discovery and Explanation of the Dialectical Illusion in all
Transcendental Proofs of the Existence of a Necessary Being 514


I won't go into the above details. Generally if you have understood Kant you will note his philosophy [God as illusory] will contradict the existence of Allah.



Quote:
the average Arabic reader is not going to understand Daleen as being "Those who have gone astray" nor understand almaghdoobi as meaning "Those who earn your wrath."

It is important to know that only a small percentage of the world's Muslims will read the Qur'an in English. Those that do are also aware that no translation is the Qur'an. I suspect that the majority of readers of the English translations are not Muslims. I am a little disappointed in the Hilali-Khan translation.
It reflects the wahabbi views of the al-Saud monarchy and is a rewrite passed off to the unknowing as being a Qur'an.

To know how most Muslims understand the Qur'an you have to find out how an Arabic speaker understands it. I do not know a single Arabic speaking Muslim who would understand the Qur'an as it is presented by Hilali-Khan
It is not the question of the average Arabic reader not reading it.


The critical point is such potentially malignant element exists in 1:7 and supported by thousands of verses of disdain, contempt, hatred, abhorrence, and the likes against the Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims.


As discussed re the good majority, probably 80% of moderate Muslim will not be influenced by 1:7 and other evil laden verses.
The real problem is the 20% of evil prone Muslims which is represented by a potential pool of 300 million evil prone Muslims being influenced and inspired by those evil laden verses [e.g. 1:7 and others] to commit terrible evils and violence. This is already a reality and I am only tracing and explaining its ultimate root causes that exists partly in the Quran itself.


If there were only 100 Muslims around the world, 20%, i.e. 20 would be no problem BUT in reality we are dealing with a pool of 300 millions evil prone Muslims.
You cannot deny the reality of 1:7 and its associated evil elements influencing some evil prone clergies [experts, scholars, e.g. Hilali-Khan] who in turn influence ordinary evil prone Muslims.


I agree with Hilali-Khan interpretation in the context of the Quran as it is very obvious if one read the Quran objectively.


Since there is no central authority in Islam no one on Earth can insist they are wrong. Therefrom SOME [not all], possibly up to 300 millions will be influenced to hate Jews, Christians and non-Muslims and SOME will go on to kill and commit terrible evils and violence on non-Muslims as it is happening in reality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2016, 06:09 AM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,311,550 times
Reputation: 7407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Continuum View Post
Note in the Critique of Pure Reason [CPR], Kant demonstrated the transcendental idea of God is an illusion.


If you review the index of the CPR you will note the following sub-chapters;



Section3. The Arguments of Speculative Reason in Proof of
the Existence of a SupremeBeing .... 494


Section4. The Impossibility of an Ontological Proof of
the Existence of God... 500


Section5. The Impossibility of a Cosmological Proof of
the Existence of God...... 407


Discovery and Explanation of the Dialectical Illusion in all
Transcendental Proofs of the Existence of a Necessary Being 514


I won't go into the above details. Generally if you have understood Kant you will note his philosophy [God as illusory] will contradict the existence of Allah.



It is not the question of the average Arabic reader not reading it.


The critical point is such potentially malignant element exists in 1:7 and supported by thousands of verses of disdain, contempt, hatred, abhorrence, and the likes against the Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims.


As discussed re the good majority, probably 80% of moderate Muslim will not be influenced by 1:7 and other evil laden verses.
The real problem is the 20% of evil prone Muslims which is represented by a potential pool of 300 million evil prone Muslims being influenced and inspired by those evil laden verses [e.g. 1:7 and others] to commit terrible evils and violence. This is already a reality and I am only tracing and explaining its ultimate root causes that exists partly in the Quran itself.


If there were only 100 Muslims around the world, 20%, i.e. 20 would be no problem BUT in reality we are dealing with a pool of 300 millions evil prone Muslims.
You cannot deny the reality of 1:7 and its associated evil elements influencing some evil prone clergies [experts, scholars, e.g. Hilali-Khan] who in turn influence ordinary evil prone Muslims.


I agree with Hilali-Khan interpretation in the context of the Quran as it is very obvious if one read the Quran objectively.


Since there is no central authority in Islam no one on Earth can insist they are wrong. Therefrom SOME [not all], possibly up to 300 millions will be influenced to hate Jews, Christians and non-Muslims and SOME will go on to kill and commit terrible evils and violence on non-Muslims as it is happening in reality.
I really doubt more than 1% of the World's Muslims read the Qur'an in English. But that sad part is The Hilali-Khan translation is going to be attractive to English speaking non-Mulsim radicals and that will be the type that will join ISIS. It strikes be as a plan to recruit non-Muslims for ISIS and looking at the high number of ISIS members that are recent English speaking converts, it seems to be working.

Quote:
Since there is no central authority in Islam no one on Earth can insist they are wrong. Therefrom SOME [not all], possibly up to 300 millions will be influenced to hate Jews, Christians and non-Muslims and SOME will go on to kill and commit terrible evils and violence on non-Muslims as it is happening in reality.
However here we are speaking of the accuracy of the Translation. The Hilali-Khan translation is quite far from being an accurate translation. to the point that to a person who is reasonably fluent in Arabic and English would not consider it to be a translation but rather a English rewriting with little concern for the Arabic meaning.

The good part is the Hilali-Khan translation will only affect those that read the Qur'an only in English. The bad news is there are over 1 billion English speaking non-Muslims in the world each a potential recruit for ISIS.
__________________
When posting as a MOD my posts will be in red

No advertising, no copyrighted material, no personal attacks


MODERATOR OF: Buddhism: Judaism: Paganism:

When in doubt read the TOS MOD LIST FAQ's
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2016, 06:57 AM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,311,550 times
Reputation: 7407
We have strayed very far off-Topic here as the original topic was regarding Salat not translations of the Qur'an.

But than again I can see that those that have read some of the radicalized English translations would question the origins of salat and if it is Islamic.

As I brought out my criticism of the Hilali-Khan translation I feel I should point out that it is not accepted by many English speaking Muslims.

Here are some criticisms of it from English speaking Muslims world wide:

The seeds of the "Allah" controversy, the custody battles between Muslim and non-Muslim spouses and the spread of anti-Christian feelings in Malaysia can be traced to a certain translation of the Quran, a recent forum on Muslim extremism in Kuala Lumpur was told.

This widely available translation, called the Hilali-Khan, made Muslims think that Islam was a religion hostile to other faiths, said academic and progressive Muslim thinker Dr Ahmad Farouk Musa.
- See more at: Muslim extremism found in problematic Quran translation, forum told - The Malaysian Insider

The Hilali-Khan translation has been criticised by several prominent Western Muslims.
Khaleel Mohammed has taken the translation to task for “[reading] more like a supremacist Muslim, anti-Semitic, anti-Christian polemic than a rendition of the Islamic scripture,” while Sheila Musaji complains that it “is shocking in its distortions of the message of the Qur’an and amounts to a rewrite not a translation.” Dr. Robert (Farooq) D. Crane states that it is “Perhaps the most extremist translation ever made of the Qur’an.”
Khaled Abou El Fadl attacks what he calls “grotesque misogyny” in the translation.
The Hilali-Khan translation could be called an amplified translation, as it adds parenthetical comments into the text for the sake of clarity. However, these parenthetical comments are the source of much of the controversy.
As an example, Khaleel Mohammed condemns the Hilali-Khan translation of the final two verses of the very first sura, Al-Fatiha:
Guide us to the Straight Way
The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace,
not (the way) of those who earned Your Anger (such as the Jews),
nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians).
These lines have drawn criticism, since mention of Jews and Christians is not present in the original Arabic; though there is a hadith in which Muhammad himself makes these connections.
Get that? Those words in parenthesis (highlighted red) are NOT in the original Arabic Qur’an! This “translation” is corrupt from the very first surah! Consider what the real Qur’an says about Jews and Christians:

Beware of the Halali-Khan version of the Qur’an

Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din al-Hilali & Muhammad Muhsin Khan

The Hilali-Khan translation, or more exactly, Muhammad Taqi al-Din al-Hilali and Muhammad Muhsin Kahn translation, The Noble Quran, is globally distributed from Saudi Arabia. Khan served as the actual translator and al-Hilali as the religious authority and the actual text is based on the exegeses of Ibn al-Kathir and al-Tabari. The primary text is claimed to be derived from Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s translation, though the literary style and language seems more roughly hewn. The publisher and distributor King Fahd Holy Qur’an Printing Complex, has given away free copies to Pilgrimages (Hajj) and through other gratis distribution channels, making it a widely circulated translation. Overall, the translation is to some degree lucid (for Muslims and non-Muslims alike that have an intermediate understanding of different Arabic transliterated words without prior explanations of their meanings), but the text suffers from polemic statements that is inserted in the text in parenthesis and the annotated notes. This make the translation a ultra-traditional interpretation of the Quran, where parenthetical interpolations is wedged into the Quran verses, in order to ensure that the reader understand these in accordance with the partisan, religio-social vision that is improperly implies prevailed in Muslim societies during the classical period. Beside of the ultra-traditionalist interpretations of the text and references, the translation with all the annotated text and commentaries, make it distract from the timeless message of the Quran. The King Fahd Holy Qur’an Printing Complex has since then translated the Hilali-Khan translation in multiple languages.
The Quran

Boycotting Quran application on i-phone

URL - Qur'aan today: Boycotting Quran application on i-phone

An email has been forwarded a few times from respected Imam Zafar Anjum and other Muslim groups like Frisco Masjid and Irving Muslims. I am posting this at Muslims Together, Qur'aan today and to the World MuslimCongress@yahoogroups.com, and other Muslim groups of Pakistan, Indonesia and Bangladesh where it could hurt fellow Muslims.

There are 25 Quraan translations on the market today, most of them are alright, a few of them are great and two of them are ugly. One was written in 1042 AD and is the foundation for Islamophobia, and the other one was translated by a Muslim Hilali Khan in 1920’s.

The hate and Islamophobia we see today emanated from this translation with 60 deliberate mistranslations, causing ill-will towards Jews and Christians. The Hilali Khan translation has projected God (Muslim God?) as hateful towards Christians and Jews. Thank God, much of this is corrected since 2011 - but millions of copies are out there promoting hatred. By engaging with the right wingers like Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer and others, I have learned the sources of their false premises. It is this translation. Full story and a whole lot of links at Qur'aan conference

Muslims Together : Boycotting Quran application on i-phone
__________________
When posting as a MOD my posts will be in red

No advertising, no copyrighted material, no personal attacks


MODERATOR OF: Buddhism: Judaism: Paganism:

When in doubt read the TOS MOD LIST FAQ's
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2016, 10:32 PM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,590,726 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post
I really doubt more than 1% of the World's Muslims read the Qur'an in English. But that sad part is The Hilali-Khan translation is going to be attractive to English speaking non-Mulsim radicals and that will be the type that will join ISIS. It strikes be as a plan to recruit non-Muslims for ISIS and looking at the high number of ISIS members that are recent English speaking converts, it seems to be working.
I read somewhere the Noble Quran [English Translation of The Noble Quran - NobleQuran.com] is also available in other languages. [need to confirm this?]
This Quran in Indonesian by the Saudi Publisher [??]
Al-Quran Dan Terjemahnya - Indonesian translation of the Quran.




Note the full edition of the Noble Quran is 9 volume with a lot of explanatory notes.
So it is not brainwashing as one can read up the notes and made up one's mind.

Even the summarized edition is 978 pages with lots of explanatory notes.
If you read Chapter 1, the Noble Quran supported their points 'anger -such as the Jews" and "astray- such as the Christians" with detailed explanatory notes.


Quote:
However here we are speaking of the accuracy of the Translation. The Hilali-Khan translation is quite far from being an accurate translation. to the point that to a person who is reasonably fluent in Arabic and English would not consider it to be a translation but rather a English rewriting with little concern for the Arabic meaning.
Before you made the above comments, have you read the Hilali-Khan summarized edition [978] with explanatory notes??
Before you finalized your conclusion about Hilali-Khan's Quran you should also read their full 9 volumes to enable your criticisms to be credible.

[/quote]The good part is the Hilali-Khan translation will only affect those that read the Qur'an only in English. The bad news is there are over 1 billion English speaking non-Muslims in the world each a potential recruit for ISIS.[/quote]Now you are recognizing the fact of the reality of Islam and Muslims.


The point is no one on Earth can insist Hilali-Khan's translation is wrong. Both Hilali & Khan are notable Islamic scholars.


We are not worried about the moderates who read the Noble Quran but the fact is there will always be a natural percentile [20%] of evil prone Muslims who will have heavy inclinations and proclivities towards the evil laden elements that are inherent in the Quran.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2016, 10:43 PM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,590,726 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post
Here are some criticisms of it from English speaking Muslims world wide:
I noted most of the critics of the Hilali-Khan you listed are from the moderates of the extreme left [English Speaking Muslims as you mentioned].


I am sure they have not read the Hilali-Khan with its detailed explanatory notes and the 9 volume full editions.
I believe many of these critics who are Muslims will have nothing to dispute against Hilali-Khan on the supporting notes they provided.
Can you?

There are no serious criticisms from the extreme right and the majority of Muslims.


I have given my rational and objective views why Hilali-Khan is right with their added parenthesis in 1:7 regarding the Jews and Christians as their points are supported in the context of the whole Quran and more so from the Ahadiths.
The addition of the parenthesis by Hilali-Khan are unpleasant but they are merely stating the objective facts as far as Allah, Islam and the Quran are concerned. The truth is indeed ugly and painful to know.
Can you prove me wrong on this?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2016, 02:42 AM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,311,550 times
Reputation: 7407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Continuum View Post
I read somewhere the Noble Quran [English Translation of The Noble Quran - NobleQuran.com] is also available in other languages. [need to confirm this?]
This Quran in Indonesian by the Saudi Publisher [??]
Al-Quran Dan Terjemahnya - Indonesian translation of the Quran.




Note the full edition of the Noble Quran is 9 volume with a lot of explanatory notes.
So it is not brainwashing as one can read up the notes and made up one's mind.

Even the summarized edition is 978 pages with lots of explanatory notes.
If you read Chapter 1, the Noble Quran supported their points 'anger -such as the Jews" and "astray- such as the Christians" with detailed explanatory notes.


Before you made the above comments, have you read the Hilali-Khan summarized edition [978] with explanatory notes??
Before you finalized your conclusion about Hilali-Khan's Quran you should also read their full 9 volumes to enable your criticisms to be credible.
The good part is the Hilali-Khan translation will only affect those that read the Qur'an only in English. The bad news is there are over 1 billion English speaking non-Muslims in the world each a potential recruit for ISIS.[/quote]Now you are recognizing the fact of the reality of Islam and Muslims.


The point is no one on Earth can insist Hilali-Khan's translation is wrong. Both Hilali & Khan are notable Islamic scholars.


We are not worried about the moderates who read the Noble Quran but the fact is there will always be a natural percentile [20%] of evil prone Muslims who will have heavy inclinations and proclivities towards the evil laden elements that are inherent in the Quran.[/quote]

The problem is Hilal and Khan have added their own Salafi (Wahhabi) beliefs inti the Qur'an and not those are being passed off as translations of the Qur'an.

It is true Saudi is translating the Hilali-Khan English translations into other languages. Would it not be more accurate to Translate the Arabic into other languages? Both Hilali and Khan are Salafi and it is Salafi views they are promoting. They do seem to have an agendda to promote hatred of Christians and Jews as being Islamic.

They are ignoring that the Qur'an refers to Jews, Sabeeans and Christians as "People of the Book" No where in the Qur'an are Jews, Sabeeans and Christians referred to as Kafir.

Muslim men are permitted to marry Christian Sabeean and Jewish women and they are not under any obligation to accept Islam. Even today it is not uncommon for Muslim ment to have Christian or Jewish wives. When you are permitted to marry a people it does not sound like you are promoting hatred of the people.

The Sabeeans have lived in Iraq on the banks of the Euphrates ever since the the Jews and Christians kicked them out of the region. But sadly they are probably extinct now at the hands of ISIS who follow the Hilali-Khan Translation.
__________________
When posting as a MOD my posts will be in red

No advertising, no copyrighted material, no personal attacks


MODERATOR OF: Buddhism: Judaism: Paganism:

When in doubt read the TOS MOD LIST FAQ's
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Islam
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top