This is for Lawdog...

perplexity said:
Toilet rolls as we know them were first produced in the USA in 1857, and toothpaste dates back at least to the 18th century, and was quite common in Victorian times, albeit not available in squeezy tubes.

--- Ron.
Click to expand...


I like this avatar, Ron; much nicer. You look positively dashing!
 
samcdkey said:
Quran ( meaning recital) is the message of Islam.

Literally, Islam means submission, peace, and salvation. In its most fundamental aspect, Islam is epitomized in the most frequently recited of all Qur’anic phrases, the Basmalahi—In the name of God, the Merciful (al-Rahmani), the Compassionate (al-Rahim). Both words are related to the quality of rahma (mercy and compassion). God manifests Himself through His absolute, all-inclusive Mercy and Compassion, and Islam is founded upon that affirmation.
Click to expand...

There is alot to admire about the message of Islam as you describe it.

What I find hard to understand is, why is there such a complication in translating this into more languages.

I think you mentioned something earlier so I'll ponder on that for a while.
 
samcdkey said:
one translation of verse # 13:31

Even if a Quran caused mountains to move, or the earth to tear asunder, or the dead to speak (they will not believe). GOD controls all things. Is it not time for the believers to give up and realize that if GOD willed, He could have guided all the people? The disbelievers will continue to suffer disasters, as a consequence of their own works, or have disasters strike close to them, until GOD's promise is fulfilled.GOD will never change the predetermined destiny.

this is the actual translation:

And if there had been a Quran with which mountains could be moved (from their places) or the earth could be cloven asunder, or the dead could be made to speak ( it would not have been other than this Quran). But the decision of all things is certainly with Allah. Have not then those who believed yet known that had Allah willed, he could have guided all mankind? And a disaster will not cease to strike those who disbelieved because of their deeds, or it settles close to their home, until the promise of Allah comes to pass. Caertainly, Allah does not break His promise.

Do you see the differences in meaning? They are subtle, but important.

Another common mixup is between momineen (believer) and muslimeen (Muslim). A believer is one who follows the right way and a Muslim is one who follows Islam. Both terms are used specifically in Arabic, but used interchangeably in English. Similarly for kaafir (nonbeliever in Islam) and mushrik (one who is not a monotheist); they are both called disbelievers in English.
Click to expand...
Ok. Here's my point. Who made the above translations? Someone who knew arabic, read it and translated it, right? So which one is correct? If three devout muslim translators who are fluent in arabic and english come up with translations that have subtle but important differences, this means that each translator was understanding it differently. So if the quran is inherently unclear, even to devout arabic speakers, what validity does any of it have?

My point is that if a paragraph in the quran has a definite meaning, then a good translator can capture that meaning and make the intention completely clear and faithful to the original. If you have a word ishtbul that means a subtle form of deviousness, but there is no single word in english for this concept, then translate it as "a subtle form of deviousness". See?
 
davewhite04 said:
What I find hard to understand is, why is there such a complication in translating this into more languages.
Click to expand...
Good question! ^^^^^^^

I'm still convinced that its a direct result of these holy books being inherently unclear and open to a vast array of interpretations.
 
superluminal said:
Good question! ^^^^^^^

I'm still convinced that its a direct result of these holy books being inherently unclear and open to a vast array of interpretations.
Click to expand...

2gunsfiring_v1.gif
Didn't you read my posts? Anyway, the Quran is translated in all languages ( I think) you just have to have the Arabic alongside.
 
samcdkey said:
2gunsfiring_v1.gif
Didn't you read my posts? Anyway, the Quran is translated in all languages ( I think) you just have to have the Arabic alongside.
Click to expand...
sterb003.gif
I read em, gunslinger. But what if you don't have the language skills to learn arabic?
 
superluminal said:
Ok. Here's my point. Who made the above translations? Someone who knew arabic, read it and translated it, right? So which one is correct? If three devout muslim translators who are fluent in arabic and english come up with translations that have subtle but important differences, this means that each translator was understanding it differently. So if the quran is inherently unclear, even to devout arabic speakers, what validity does any of it have?

My point is that if a paragraph in the quran has a definite meaning, then a good translator can capture that meaning and make the intention completely clear and faithful to the original. If you have a word ishtbul that means a subtle form of deviousness, but there is no single word in english for this concept, then translate it as "a subtle form of deviousness". See?
Click to expand...


When translating three things are required:

1. understand the verse and its context

2. understand Arabic spoken and written ( the Quran is a recital so it is in meter)

3. understand speak read and write English and translate from the Arabic in the right context.

Since there is no rule about WHO may translate the Quran, anyone can translate it including a non-Muslim, and there are hundreds and hundreds of translations floating around.

I got mine in Mecca; its the translation by the Islamic University in Medina.
 
superluminal said:
sterb003.gif
I read em, gunslinger. But what if you don't have the language skills to learn arabic?
Click to expand...

Yup thats where we are falling short; there are some versions that are universally accepted e.g. the Abdullah Yusuf Ali version is considered pretty good; but its like reading Shakespeare in French, you get the general idea but not the poetry and word play.
 
samcdkey said:
Yup thats where we are falling short; there are some versions that are universally accepted e.g. the Abdullah Yusuf Ali version is considered pretty good; but its like reading Shakespeare in French, you get the general idea but not the poetry and word play.
Click to expand...
Exactly.
 
superluminal said:
Cool!
Click to expand...

Well it is cool, but its also a giant mall; incredibly commercialized; they even sell the water of the Zamzam spring ( thats an eternal spring which runs inside near the black stone that all associate with Mecca).
 
samcdkey said:
Well it is cool, but its also a giant mall; incredibly commercialized; they even sell the water of the Zamzam spring ( thats an eternal spring which runs inside near the black stone that all associate with Mecca).
Click to expand...
I find that amazing. My impression is that the powers-that-be would never allow such a thing. How does that fit in with the sacred nature of the place? I'm really suprised.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top