Login

AbuNoran · 06-09-2003, 01:58 AM

As-salaam Alla maan Etba El-Hoda, [Image: smile.gif]

السلام على من أتبع الهدى [Image: smile.gif]

الحمد لله رب العالمين وأصلي وأسلم على خير خلقه أجمعين نبينا محمد وعلى آله وأصحابه ومن اتبع سنته واهتدى بهديه إلى يوم الدين أما بعد,[/color:912eb756af]

Could someone dare to put the Quran on trial? The word of ALLAH (SWT) is being questioned? Subhan ALLAH from those things they ascribe to him.

Az-Zukhruf (Surah #43)

[82] Glory to the Lord of the heavens and the earth, the Lord of the Throne (of Authority)! (He is free) from the things they attribute (to Him)! 

[83] So leave them to babble and play (with vanities) until they meet that Day of theirs, which they have been promised. 

[84] It is He Who is God in heaven and God on earth; and He is Full of Wisdom and Knowledge. 

[85] And blessed is He to Whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all between them: with Him is the knowledge of the Hour (of Judgment): and to Him shall ye be brought back.[/color:912eb756af] 

Yes they did, infidels always did, we had an example of one on this board just yesterday. 

http://www.islamsms.com/bb/viewtopic.php?t=860

Well, What do they know about the Quran? 

Aparently NOTHING. They never did, and will never do.

What they try to do when talking about such a subject is to approach the weak Muslims that has no or little knowledge of Islam. Their aim is to engage with them in such a talk, of course at one point they will start winning the discussion, not because they are right, not at all, but because they are just taking advantage of the poor knowledge of the weak Muslims that can't answer them right due to their lack of knowledge. A lot of Muslims have fallen in that trap before and will continue to as long as they keep engaging in such talks with no knowledge to answer the infidels.[/color:912eb756af]

Insha ALLAH in this thread we will talk about the light and wisdom in the Quran. We will also try to explain (it's very hard to explain cause you can't hear how I read and understand how to prenounce the letters, and where do they orginate from and how the tongue moves to prenounce certain letters in a certain way, but we will try) the rules of reading the Quran (Ahkam Al-Qera'a), the rules of reciting the Quran (Ahkam Al-Tajweed) and the differences between each way, we will try to explain the letters and dots that appear on top of each word in the Quran, what they mean and how they can change how a word is prenounced, and a lot more. 

Any of the reciters of the Quran have to go to Islamic schools at the age of 5 years old to start learning the rules of reading (Ahkam Al-Qera'a) and the rules of reciting (Ahkam Al-Tajweed) the Quran.[/color:912eb756af]

Insha ALLAH, this will be a long thread with a lot of posts from the moderators brothers and sisters along myself.

Its main porpose is [u:912eb756af]NOT[/u:912eb756af] to answer those infidels only, but yet to educate Muslims about our beloved book, the book that ALLAH (SWT) talks to us in. 

The Quran was NIETHER written NOR created by ALLAH (SWT), The Quran is the spoken word of ALLAH (SWT) revealed to Mohammad (SAAWS) by the honest Angel Gebreil.[/color:912eb756af] 

An-Nisaa (Surah #4) 

[82] Do they not consider the Qur-an (with care)? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy. 

[83] When there comes to them some matter touching (public) safety or fear, they divulge it. If they had only referred it to the Messenger or to those charged with authority among them, the proper investigators would have tested it from them (direct). Were it not for the Grace and Mercy of Allah unto you, all but a few of you would have followed Satan. 

[84] Then fight in Allah's cause - thou art held responsible only for thyself - and rouse the Believers. It may be that Allah will restrain the fury of the Unbelievers; for Allah is the strongest in might and in punishment.[/color:912eb756af] 

Al-An'am (Surah #6) 

[25] Of them there are some who (pretend to) listen to thee; but We have thrown veils on their hearts, so they understand it not, and deafness in their ears; if they saw every one of the Signs, they will not believe in them; in so much that when they come to thee; they (but) dispute with thee; the Unbelievers say: "These are nothing but tales of the ancients." 

[26] Others they keep away from it, and themselves they keep away; but they only destroy their own souls, and they perceive it not. 

[27] If thou couldst but see when they are confronted with the Fire! They will say: "Would that we were but sent back! Then would we not reject the Signs of our Lord, but would be amongst those who believe!"[/color:912eb756af] 

[u:912eb756af]The main reason that I choose to start this topic and not continue with the topic that the infidel started is the following Ayat[/u:912eb756af]:[/color:912eb756af]

Al-An'am (Surah #6) 

[68] When thou seest men engaged in vain discourse about Our Signs, turn away from them unless they turn to a different theme. If Satan ever makes thee forget, then after recollection, sit not thou in the company of those who do wrong. 

[69] On their account no responsibility falls on the righteous, but (their duty) is to remind them, that they may (learn to) fear Allah. 

[70] Leave alone those who take their religion to be mere play and amusement, and are deceived by the life of this world. But proclaim (to them) this (truth): that every soul delivers itself to ruin by its own acts; it will find for itself no protector or intercessor except Allah; if it offered every ransom, (or reparation), none will be accepted; such is (the end of) those who deliver themselves to ruin by their own acts: they will have for drink (only) boiling water, and for punishment, one most grievous; for they persisted in rejecting Allah.[/color:912eb756af] 

Al-Hijr (Surah #15)

إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ

وَهُوَ الْقُرْآن وَهُوَ الْحَافِظ لَهُ مِنْ التَّغْيِير وَالتَّبْدِيل وَمِنْهُمْ مَنْ أَعَادَ الضَّمِير فِي قَوْله تَعَالَى " لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ " عَلَى النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَقَوْلِهِ " وَاَللَّه يَعْصِمك مِنْ النَّاس " وَالْمَعْنَى الْأَوَّل أَوْلَى وَهُوَ ظَاهِر السِّيَاق .[/size:912eb756af][/color:912eb756af]

[b:912eb756af][9] We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption).[/color:912eb756af][/b:912eb756af]

Now its time to start learning about The Miracle of Miracles.

This thread is intended as an informative thread and NOT as a discussion thread and that's is why its locked, only the moderators will unlock it to post their reply then lock it again, in that way we can keep the flow of the thread and we will not engage in any discussions that will derail the thread from its pass. 

If anyone needs to discuss a certain part, then they can copy whatever needs futher explanation to another thread and we can all reply to it.[/size:912eb756af][/color:912eb756af]

AbuNoran · 06-09-2003, 03:09 AM

In this Book, the Holy Prophet's life, the history of the Arabs and the events which occurred during the period of the revelation of the Quran have not been mingled with the Divine Verses, as is the case with the Bible. The Quran is the pure word of Allah. Not one word therein is not divine. Not a single word has been deleted from its text. The Book has been handed down to our age in its complete and original form since the time of Prophet Muhammad. From the time the Book began to be revealed, the Holy Prophet had dictated its text to the scribes. Whenever some Divine Message was revealed, the Holy Prophet would call a scribe and dictate its words to him. The written text was then read out to the Holy Prophet, who, having satisfied himself that the scribe has committed no error of recording, would put the manuscript in safe custody.

The Holy Prophet used to instruct the scribe about the sequence in which a revealed message was to be placed in a particular Surah (chapter). In this manner, the Holy Prophet continued to arrange the text of the Quran in systematic order till the end of the chain of revelations. Again, it was ordained from the beginning of Islam that a recitation of the Holy Quran must be an integral part of worship. Hence the illustrious Companions would commit the Divine verses to memory as soon as they were revealed. Many of them learned the whole text and a far larger number had memorized different portions of it.

Method of preservations of the Quran during the Prophet's time

Besides, those of the Companions who were literate used to keep a written record of several portions of the Holy Qur'an. In this manner, the text of the Holy Qur'an had been preserved in four different ways during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (PBUH):

a) The Holy Prophet (PBUH) had the whole text of the Divine Messages from the beginning to the end committed to writing by the scribes of revelations.

[Image: cool.gif]

Many of the Companions learned the whole text of the Qur'an, every syllable of it, by heart.

c) All the illustrious Companions, without an exception, had memorized at least some portions of the Holy Qur'an, for the simple reason that it was obligatory for them to recite it during worship. An estimate of the number of the illustrious Companions may be obtained from the fact that one hundred and forty thousands Companions had participated in the Last Pilgrimage performed by the Holy Prophet (PBUH).

d) A considerable number of the literate Companions kept a private record of the text of the Qur'an and satisfied themselves as to the purity of their record by reading it out to the Holy Prophet (PBUH).

Method of preservations of the Quran after the demise of the Prophet:

It is an incontrovertible historical truth that the text of the Holy Qur'an extant today is, syllable for syllable, exactly the same as the Holy Prophet (PBUH) had offered to the world as the Word of Allah. After the demise of the Holy Prophet, the first Caliph Abu Bakr assembled all the Huffaz and the written records of the Holy Qur'an and with their help had the whole text written in Book form. In the time of 'Uthman copies of this original version were made and officially dispatched to the Capitals of the Islamic World. Two Of these copies exist in the world today, one in Istanbul and the other in Tashkent. Whosoever is so inclined may compare any printed text of the Holy Qur'an with those two copies, he shall find no variation.

And how can one expect any discrepancy, when there have existed several million Huffaz in every generation since the time of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and in our own time? Should anyone alter a syllable of the original text of the Qur'an, these Huffaz would at once expose the mistake.[/color:cd64295cad]

In the last century, an Institute of Munich University in Germany collected FORTY-TWO THOUSAND copies of the Holy Qur'an including manuscripts and printed texts produced in each period in the various parts of the Islamic World. Research work was carried out on these texts for half a century, at the end of which the researchers concluded that apart from copying mistakes, there was no discrepancy in the text of these forty-two thousand copies, even though they belonged to the period between the 1st Century Hijra to 14th Century Hijra and had been procured from all parts of the world. This Institute, alas! perished in the bombing attacks on Germany during World War II, but the findings of its research project survived.[/color:cd64295cad] 

 Another point that must be kept in view is that the word in which the Qur'an was revealed is a living language in our own time. It is still current as the mother tongue of about a hundred million people from Iraq to Morocco. In the non-Arab world too, hundreds of thousands of people study and teach this language. 

 The grammar of the Arabic language, its lexicon, its phonetic system and its phraseology, have remained intact for fourteen hundred years. 

 A modern Arabic-speaking person can comprehend the Holy Qur'an with as much proficiency as did the Arabs of fourteen centuries ago. This, then, is an important attribute of Muhammad (PBUH), which is shared by no other Prophet or Leader of Religion. The Book which God revealed to Him for the guidance of mankind is today's in its original language without the slightest alteration in its vocabulary.[/color:cd64295cad]

AbuNoran · 06-10-2003, 12:20 AM

Say: If the whole of mankind and jinns were to gather together to produce the like of this Qur`an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they backed up each other with help and support.

What is a miracle?

I think it is necessary that we have a clear picture of what we mean by a miracle. Here are some definitions:-

"An event that appears so inexplicable by the laws of nature, that it is held to be supernatural in origin or an act of God." "A person, thing or event that excites admiring awe." "An act beyond human power, an impossibility."

It is logical that greater the impossibility, greater the miracle. For example, should a person expire before our very eyes and is certified dead by a qualified medical man, yet later on a mystic or a saint commands the corpse to 'arise!', and to everybody's astonishment the person gets up and walks away , we would label that as a miracle. But if the resurrection of the dead took place after the corpse had been in the mortuary for three days, then we would acclaim this as a greater miracle. And if the dead was made to arise from the grave, decades or centuries after the body had decomposed and rotted away, then in that case we would label it the greatest miracle of them all!

A Common Trait:

It has been a common trait of mankind since time immemorial that whenever a guide from God appeared to redirect their steps into the will and plan of God; they demanded supernatural proofs from these men of God, instead of accepting message on its merit.

For example, when Jesus Christ (pbuh) began to preach to his people - "the children of Israel" - to mend their ways and to refrain from mere legalistic formalism and imbibe the true spirit of the laws and commandments of god, his 'people' demanded miracles from him to prove his bona fides ( his authenticity , his genuineness), as recorded in the Christian scriptures:

Then certain of the scribes and the Pharisees answered, saying master, we would have a sign ( miracle ) from thee. But he answered and said unto them, "an evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign (miracle) and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas ( Matthew 12:38-39 holy bible)

Though on the face of it, Jesus (pbuh) refuses to pamper the Jews here, in actual fact, he did perform many miracles as we learn from the gospel narratives.

The holy Bible is full of supernatural events accredited to the prophets from their Lord. In reality all those 'signs' and 'wonders' and 'miracles' were acts of God, but since those miracles were worked through his human agents, we describe them as the miracles of prophets (i.e. Moses or Jesus (pbuh) by those hands they were performed).

Quirk Continues:

Some six hundred years after the birth of Jesus (pbuh), Muhammad (pbuh) the messenger of God was born in Makkah in Arabia. When he proclaimed his mission at the age of forty, his fellow countrymen, the mushriks of Makkah made an identical request for miracles, as had the Jews, from their promised Messiah. Text book style, it was as if the Arabs had taken a leaf from the Christian records. History has a habit of repeating itself!

And they say: why are not signs sent down to him from his Lord? (Holy Quran 29:50)

SIGNS! WHAT SIGNS!!

"Miracles ? Cries he, what miracles would you have? Are not you yourselves there? God made you 'shaped you out of a little clay.' Ye were small once; a few years ago ye were not at all. Ye have beauty, strength, thoughts, 'ye have compassion on one another.' Old age comes-on you, and gray hairs; your strength fades into feebleness: ye sink down, and again are not. 'Ye have compassion on one another': This struck me much: Allah might have made you having no compassion on one another, how had it been then! this is a great direct though, a glance at first-hand into the very fact of things...." "(On heroes hero-worship and the heroic in history,") by Thomas Carlyle.

"This Struck Me Much"

This, that "ye have compassion on one another", impressed Thomas Carlyle most from his perusal of an English translation. I presume, there verse that motivated this sentiment is:

1. And among His signs is this, that He created for you mates from among yourselves, that ye may dwell in tranquility with them. and He has put love and mercy between your (hearts): verily in that are signs for those who reflect. (emphasis added) Translation by A Yusuf Ali (Quran 30:21)

2. And one of His signs it is, that He hath created wives for you of your own species that ye may dwell with them, and hath put love and tenderness between you. herein truly are signs for those who reflect (emphasis added) Translation by Rev. J.M. Rodwell (M.A.)

3. By another sign He gave you wives from among yourselves, that ye might live in joy with them, and planted love and kindness into your hearts. surely there are signs in this for thinking men(emphasis added) Translation by N.J. Dawood.

The first example is from the translation by Yusuf Ali, a Muslim. The second is by a Christian priest the rev. Rodwell and the last example is by an Iraqi Jew, N.J. Dawood.

Unfortunately Thomas Carlyle had no access to any one of these because none of them had seen the light of day in his time. The only one available to him in 1840 was as he said on page 85 of his book under reference - "We also can read the Koran; our translation of it, by sale, is known to be a very fair one."

Taint Is In The Motive:

Carlyle is very charitable to his fellow countryman. The motives of George sale, who pioneered an English translation of the Holy Quran, were suspect. He makes no secret of his antagonism to the holy book of Islam. In his preface to his translation in 1734 he made it known that it was his avowed intention to expose the man Mohammad and his forgery. He records: "who can apprehend any danger from so manifest a forgery?... The protestants alone are able to attack the Koran with success; and for them, I trust, providence has reserved the glory of its overthrow." George Sale, And he set to work with his prejudiced translation. You will be able to judge how 'fair' and scholarly George sale was from the very verse which 'struck' (Carlyle) 'much!' Compare it with the three example already given by a Muslim, a Christian and a Jew: And of his signs another is, that he had created you , out of yourselves, wives that ye may cohabit with them, and hath put love and compassion between you .

I don't think that George sale was a 'a male chauvinist pig' of his day to describe our mates, wives or spouses as sexual objects. He was only keeping to his promise, which Carlyle overlooked. The Arabic word which he (sale) perverted is 'li-tas-kunoo' which means to find peace, consolation, composure or tranquility; and not 'cohabit' meaning 'to live together in a sexual relationship when not legally married' (the reader's digest universal dictionary.)

Every word of the Quranic text is meticulously chosen, chiseled and placed by the All-Wise himself. They carry God's 'fingerprint', and are signs of God. And yet, the spiritually jaundiced....

Ask For A Sign:

What signs?? They mean some special kinds of signs or miracles such as their own foolish minds dictate. Everything is possible for God, but God is not going to humor the follies of men or listen to their false demands. He has sent his messenger to explain his signs clearly, and to warn them of the consequences of rejection. Is that not enough? The trend of their demand is generally as follows:

In specific terms they asked that he - Muhammad (pbuh) - 'Put a ladder up to heaven an bring down a book from God in their very sight' - "Then we would believe," they said. Or "ye see the mountain yonder, turn it into gold' - "then we would believe." or 'make streams to gush out in the desert' - "then we would believe."

Now listen to the soft, sweet reasoning of Muhammad(pbuh) against the unreasonable and skeptical demands of the mushriks - "Do I say to you, verily I am an angel? Do I say to you, verily in my hands are the treasures of God? Only, what is revealed to me do I follow." Listen further to the most dignified reply he is commanded by his Lord to give the unbelievers.

Say (O Muhammad): 'The signs (miracles) are indeed with Allah: And most certainly I am only a clear warner.!'

In the following ayah the holy prophet is made to point to the holy Qur`an itself as an answer to their hypocritical demand for some special kind of 'sign' of 'miracle' for which their foolish pagan mentality craved. For indeed all miracles are 'signs'; and it is their disbelief, their skepticism, their lack of faith which motivates their request for a sign. They are asked to - 'look at the Qur`an' and again, 'look at the Qur`an!'

It is not enough for them that we have sent down to thee (O Muhammad) the book(al-Qur`an) which is rehearsed to them? Verily, in it (this perspicuous book) is a mercy and reminder to those who believe. (Qur`an 29:51).

Two Proofs:

As a proof of the divine authorship and the miraculous nature of the Qur`an, two arguments are advanced by the Almighty Himself:

1. 'that we' (God Almighty) have revealed to you (O Muhammad!) 'the book to you' who art absolutely an unlearned person. An 'ummi' prophet. One who cannot read or write. One who cannot sign his own name. Let Thomas Carlyle testify regarding the educational qualifications of Muhammad -

'one other circumstance we must not forget: that he had no school learning; of the thing we call school-learning none at all.'

Moreover the divine author(God Almighty) himself testifies to the veracity of Muhammed's(pbuh) claim that he could never have composed the contents of the holy Qur`an; he could not have been its author:

And thou (O Muhammad) was not (able) to recite a book before this (book came), nor art thou (able) to transcribe it with thy right hand:

In that case, indeed, would the talkers of vanities have doubted (Qur`an 29:48).

The author of the Qur`an is reasoning with us, that had Muhammad(pbuh) been a learned man, and had he been able to read or write, then in that case the babblers in the market places might have had some justification to doubt his claim that the holy Quran is God's word. In the event of Muhammed(pbuh) being a literate person, the accusation of his enemies that he had probably copied his book (Qur`an) from the writings of the Jews and Christians, or that perhaps he had been studying Aristotle and Plato, or that he must have browsed through the 'Torat,' the 'Zabur' and the 'Injeel' and had rehashed it all in a beautiful language, might have carried some weight. Then, 'the talkers of vanities' might have had a point. But even this flimsy pretence has been denied to the unbeliever and the cynic: a point hardly big enough to hang a fly upon!

2. 'The book'? Yes, the 'book' itself, carries its own evidence proving its divine authorship. Study the book from any angel. Scrutinize it. Why not take up the author's challenge if your doubts are genuine? Do they not consider the Quran (with care) had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy.

Consistency:

It is inconceivable that any human author would remain consistent in this teachings and his preaching for a period of over two decades. From the age of forty, when Muhammad (pbuh) received his first call from heaven to the age sixty-three when he breathed his last, for twenty-three years the holy prophet practiced and preached Islam. In those twenty-three years, he passed through the most conflicting vicissitudes of life. Any man, during the course of such a mission, would be forced by circumstances to make 'honorable' compromises, and cannot help contradicting himself. No man can ever write the same always, as the message of the holy Quran is: consistent with itself, throughout! Or is it that the unbelievers objections are merely argumentive, refractory, against their own better light and judgment.? Furthermore, the holy Quran contains or mentions many matters relating to the nature of the universe which were unknown to man before but which subsequently through evolution and discoveries of Science have fully confirmed - a field where an untutored mind would have most certainly lost in wild and contradictory speculations!

Self-Evident Proof:

Again and again when miracles are demanded from the prophet of God by the cynical and frivolous few, he is made to point to the Quran - message from high - as 'the miracle.' The miracle or miracles! And men of wisdom, people with literary and spiritual insight, who were honest enough to themselves, recognized and accepted al-Quran as a genuine miracle.

Says the holy Qur`an: Nay here are signs self-evident in the hearts of those endowed with knowledge: And none but the unjust reject our signs. (The Holy Qur`an 29:49).[/color:19e7b9906a]

By Ahmed Deedat.

***Muslimah*** · 06-10-2003, 03:50 PM

Bismellah Arrahman Araheem

Praise be to Allah who guided us to this and if it was not for Him we wouldn't have been guided and prayer and peace be upon His Messenger Mohamed Ibn Abdullah, his family members and companions.

"تبت يدا أبا لهب وتب ما أغنى عنه ماله وما كسب سيصلى نارا `ذات لهب وامرأته حمالة الحطب فى جيدها حبل من مسد"

“Perish the hands of the Father of Flame! Perish he! * No profit to him from all his wealth, and all his gains! * Burnt soon will he be in a Fire of blazing Flame! * His wife shall carry the (crackling) wood as fuel! * A twisted rope of palm leaf fiber round her (own) neck!” (Surat Masad Quran 111)

Jazakum Allah kharian brother AbuNoran for you excellent series of posts reflecting on how the Quran by the Will of Allah was and shall remain protected.

However, in an effort to shed light on a different angle since we are discussing the miracle of the miracles. Surat Masad actually stands as a serious challenge to any possible alleges against the validity of the Quran in general. In simple words, the Surat is promising Abu Lahab who was the uncle of the Messenger of Allah (PAPBUH) while at the same time one of his most aggressive enemies. He was a non-believer leading serious and hostile efforts against the call to Islam. Abu Lahab exercised all forms of torture against the pioneer Muslims in Mecca. In the Surat, there is a promise to Abu Lahab that he and his wife are both fated to enter Hell fire. As simple as this, Abu Lahab could have actually blew up the Quran, as being the word of Allah, by simply declaring himself a Muslim which would of course annul the Surat. However, he didn’t he remained a pagan not realizing what Quran carried out for him and his wife of a destiny. Sobhan Allah. And people come and say let us question the validity of the Quran.

Praise be to Allah the Only Deity who is Worthy of worship

AbuNoran · 07-14-2003, 09:28 AM

As-salaam Alikum,

Wa eyakoum sister.

Insha ALLAH i will soon continue with this thread, thank you all for your patience with me and your dua too.

AbuNoran · 07-14-2003, 10:33 AM

Translating the Untranslatable: A Survey of English Translations of the Quran - by A.R. Kidwai

Despite the historical fact that the early Muslim community's stand on the translation of the Arabic text of the Quran was ambivalent, as indeed, the general Muslim attitude remains so to this day, the act of translation may be logically viewed as a natural part of the Muslim exegetical effort. However, whereas the idea of interpreting the Quran has not been so controversial, the emotional motives behind rendering the Quranic text into languages other than Arabic have always been looked upon with suspicion.

This is obvious as the need for translating the Quran arose in those historic circumstances when a large number of non-Arabic speaking people had embraced Islam, and giving new linguistic orientations to the contents of the revelation - as, for instance, happened in the case of the 'New Testament' - could have led to unforeseeable, and undesirable, developments within the body of the Islamic religion itself. (For a brief, though highly useful, survey of the Muslim attitudes towards the permissibility of translating the text of the revelation to non-Arabic tongues, see M. Ayoub, 'Translating the Meaning of the Quran: Traditional Opinions and Modern Debates', in Afkar Inquiry, Vol. 3, No. 5 (Ramadan 1406/May 1986), pp.34 9).

The Muslim need for translating the Quran into English arose mainly out of the desire to combat the missionary effort. Following a long polemical tradition, part of whose goal was also the production of a - usually erroneous and confounding - European version of the Muslim scripture, Christian missionaries started their offensive against a politically humiliated Islam in the eighteenth century by advancing their own translations of the Quran.

Obviously, Muslims could not allow the missionary effort - invariably confounding the authenticity of the text with a hostile commentary of its own - to go unopposed and unchecked. Hence, the Muslim decision to present a faithful translation of the Quranic text as well as an authentic summary of its teaching to the European world. Later, the Muslim translations were meant to serve even those Muslims whose only access to the Quranic revelation was through the medium of the European languages. Naturally, English was deemed the most important language for the Muslim purpose, not least because of the existence of the British Empire which after the Ottomans had the largest number of Muslim subjects.

The same rationale, however, applies to sectarian movements within Islam or even to renegade groups outside the fold of Islam, such as the Qadiyanis. Their considerable translation activities are motivated by the urge to proclaim their ideological uniqueness.

Although there is a spate of volumes on the multi-faceted dimensions of the Quran, no substantial work has so far been done to critically examine the mass of existing English translations of the Quran.

Even bibliographical material on this subject was quite scant before the fairly recent appearance of World Bibliography of the Translations of the Meanings of the Holy Quran (Istanbul, OIC Research Center, 1986), which provides authoritative publication details of the translations of the Quran in sixty-five languages.

Some highly useful work in this field had been done earlier by Dr. Hamidullah of Paris. Appended to the Cambridge History of Arabic Literature Volume 1, Arabic Literature to the End of the Umayyad Period (Cambridge university Press, 1983) is a bibliography of the Quran translations into European languages, prepared by J.D. Pearson, as is the latter's article in the Encyclopedia of Islam. It is, however, of not much use to the Muslim.

Since none of the above-mentioned works is annotated, the reader gets no idea about the translator's mental make-up, his dogmatic presuppositions and his approach to the Quran as well as the quality of the translation.

Similarly the small chapter entitled 'The Quran and Occidental Scholarship' in Bell and Watt's Introduction to the Quran (Edinburgh, 1970, pp. 173-86), although useful in providing background information to Orientalists' efforts in Quranic studies, and translations, more or less for the same reasons, is of little value to general Muslim readers. Thus, studies which focus on those aspects of each translation of the Quran are urgently needed lest Western scholars misguide the unsuspecting non-Arabic speaking readers of the Quran. An effort has been made in this survey to bring out the hallmarks and shortcomings of the major complete translations of the Quran.

The early English translations of the Quran by Muslims stemmed mainly from the pious enthusiasm on their part to refute the allegations leveled by the Christian missionaries against Islam in general and the Quran in particular.

Illustrative of this trend are the following translations:

(i) Mohammad Abdul Hakim Khan, The Holy Quran:'with short notes based on the Holy Quran or the authentic traditions of the Prophet, or and New Testaments or scientific truth. All fictitious romance, questionable history and disputed theories have been carefully avoided' (Patiala, 1905);

(ii) Hairat Dehlawi, The Koran Prepared, by various Oriental learned scholars and edited by Mirza Hairat Dehlawi. Intended as 'a complete and exhaustive reply to the manifold criticisms of the Koran by various Christian authors such as Drs. Sale, Rodwell, Palmer and Sir W. Muir' (Delhi, 1912); and

(iii) Mirzal Abu'l Fadl, Quran, Arabic Text and English Translation Arranged Chronologically with an Abstract (Allahabad, 1912).

Since none of these early translations was by a reputed Islamic scholar, both the quality of the translation and level of scholarship are not very high and these works are of mere historical interest.

Later works, however, reflect a more mature and scholarly effort.

Muhammad Marmaduke William Pickthall, an English man of letters who embraced Islam, holds the distinction of bringing out a first-rate rendering of the Quran in English, The Meaning of the Glorious Quran (London, 1930).

It keeps scrupulously close to the original in elegant, though now somewhat archaic, English. However, although it is one of the most widely used English translations, it provides scant explanatory notes and background information. This obviously restricts its usefulness for an uninitiated reader of the Quran.

Abdullah Yusuf Ali's The Holy Quran: Translation and Commentary (Lahore, 1934 37), perhaps the most popular translation, stands as another major achievement in this field. A civil servant by vocation, Yusuf Ali was not a scholar in the classical Muslim tradition. Small wonder, then, that some of his copious notes, particularly on hell and heaven, angels, jinn and polygamy, etc. are informed with the pseudo-rationalist spirit of his times, as for instance in the works of S. Ahmad and S. Ameer Ali.

His overemphasis on things spiritual also distorts the Quranic worldview. Against this is the fact that Yusuf Ali doubtless was one of the few Muslims who enjoyed an excellent command over the English language. It is fully reflected in his translation. Though his is more of a paraphrase than a literal translation, yet it faithfully represents the sense of the original.

Abdul Majid Daryabadi's The Holy Quran: with English Translation and Commentary (Lahore, 1941 - 57) is, however, fully cognate with the traditional Muslim viewpoint.

Like PIckthall's earlier attempt, it is a faithful rendering, supplemented with useful notes on historical, geographical and eschatological issues, particularly the illuminating discussions on comparative religion. Though the notes are not always very exhaustive, they help to dispel the doubts in the minds of Westernized readers. However, it too contains inadequate background information about the Suras (chapters of the Quran) and some of his notes need updating.

The Meaning of the Quran (Lahore, 1967), the English version of Sayyid Abul A'la Mawdud'i's magnum opus, the Urdu Tafhim al-Quran is an interpretative rendering of the Quran which remarkably succeeds in recapturing some of the majesty of the original.

Since Mawdudi, a great thinker, enjoyed rare mastery over both classical and modern scholarship, his work helps one develop an understanding of the Quran as a source of guidance. Apart from setting the verses/Suras in the circumstances of its time, the author constantly relates, though exhaustive notes, the universal message of the Quran to his own time and its specific problems. His logical line of argument, generous sensibility, judicious use of classical Muslim scholarship and practical solutions to the problems of the day combine to show Islam as a complete way of life and as the Right Path for the whole of mankind. Since the translation of this invaluable work done by Muhammad Akbar is pitiably poor and uninspiring, the much-needed new English translation of the entire work is in progress under the auspices of the Islamic Foundation, Leicester.

The Message of the Quran by Muhammad Asad (Gibraltar, 1980) represents a notable addition to the body of English translations couched in chaste English. This work is nonetheless vitiated by deviation from the viewpoint of the Muslim orthodoxy on many counts. Averse to take some Quranic statements literally, Asad denies the occurrence of such events as the throwing of Abraham into the fire, Jesus speaking in the cradle, etc. He also regards Luqman, Khizr and Zulqarnain as 'mythical figures' and holds unorthodox views on the abrogation of verses. These blemishes apart, this highly readable translation contains useful, though sometimes unreliable background information about the Quranic Suras and even provides exhaustive notes on various Quranic themes.

The fairly recent The Quran: The First American Version (Vermont, 1985) by another native Muslim speaker of English, T.B. Irving, marks the appearance of the latest major English translation. Apart from the obnoxious title, the work is bereft of textual and explanatory notes.

Using his own arbitrary judgment, Irving has assigned themes to each Quranic Ruku' (section). Although modern and forceful English has been used, it is not altogether free of instances of mistranslation and loose expressions. With American readers in mind, particularly the youth, Irving has employed many American English idioms, which, in places, are not befitting of the dignity of the Quranic diction and style.

In addition to the above, there are also a number of other English translations by Muslims, which, however, do not rank as significant ventures in this field.

They may be listed as:

1. Al-Hajj Hafiz Ghulam Sarwar, Translation of the Holy Quran (Singapore, 1920)

2. Ali Ahmad Khan Jullundri, Translation of the Glorious Holy Quran with commentary (Lahore, 1962)

3. Abdur Rahman Tariq and Ziauddin Gilani, The Holy Quran Rendered into English (Lahore, 1966)

4. Syed Abdul Latif, Al-Quran: Rendered into English (Hyderabad, 1969)

5. Hashim Amir Ali, The Message of the Quran Presented in Perspective (Tokyo, 1974)

6. Taqui al-Din al-Hilali and Muhammad Muhsin Khan, Explanatory English Translation of the Holy Quran: A Summarized Version of Ibn Kathir Supplemented by At-Tabari with Comments from Sahih al-Bukhari (Chicago, 1977)

7. Muhammad Ahmad Mofassir, The Koran: The First Tafsir in English (London, 1979)

8. Mahmud Y. Zayid, The Quran: An English Translation of the Meaning of the Quran (checked and revised in collaboration with a committee of Muslim scholars) (Beirut, 1980)

9. S.M. Sarwar, The Holy Quran: Arab Text and English Translation (Elmhurst, 1981)

10. Ahmed Ali, Al-Quran: A Contemporary Translation (Karachi, 1984).

(In view of the blasphemous statements contained in Rashad Khalifa's The Quran: The Final Scripture (Authorized English Version) (Tucson, 1978), it has not been included in the translations by Muslims).

Even amongst the Muslim translations, some are representative of the strong sectarian biases of their translators.

For example, the Shia doctrines are fully reflected in accompanying commentaries of the following books: S.V. Mir Ahmad Ali, The Holy Quran with English Translation and Commentary, according to the version of the Holy Ahlul Bait includes 'special notes from Hujjatul Islam Ayatullah Haji Mirza Mahdi Pooya Yazdi on the philosophical aspects of the verses' (Karachi, 1964); M.H. Shakir, Holy Quran (New York, 1982); Syed Muhammad Hussain at-Tabatabai, al-Mizan: An Exegesis of the Quran, translated from Persian into English by Sayyid Saeed Akhtar Rizvi (Tehran, 198~). So far five volumes of this work have been published.

Illustrative of the Barelvi sectarian stance is Holy Quran, the English version of Ahmad Raza Khan Brailai's Urdu translation, by Hanif Akhtar Fatmi (Lahore, n.d.).

As pointed out earlier, the Qadiyanis, though having abandoned Islam, have been actively engaged in translating the Quran, Apart from English, their translations are available in several European and African languages.

Muhammad Ali's The Holy Quran: English Translation (Lahore, 1917) marks the beginning of this effort. This Qadiyani translator is guilty of misinterpreting several Quranic verses, particularly those related to the Promised Messiah, his miracles and the Quranic angelology.

Similar distortions mar another Qadiyani translation by Sher Ali, The Holy Quran: Arabic Text with English Translation (Rabwah, 1955).Published under the auspices of Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmad, second successor of the "Promised Messiah" and head of the Ahmadiyyas, this oft-reprinted work represents the official Qadiyani version of the Quran. Unapologizingly, Sher Sher Ali refers to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as the "Promised Messiah" and mistranslates and misinterprets a number of Quranic verses.

Zafarullah Khan's The Quran: Arabic Text and English Translation (London, 1970) ranks as another notable Qadiyani venture in this field. Like other Qadiyanis, Zafarullah too twists the Quranic verses to opine that the door of prophethood was not closed with the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him). The obtrusion of similar obnoxious views upon the Quranic text is found in the following Qadiyani translations, too:

(i) Kamaluddin and Nazir Ahmad, A Running Commentary of the Holy Quran (London, 1948)

(ii) Salahuddin Peer, The Wonderful Koran (Lahore, 1960)

(iii) Malik Ghulam Farid, The Holy Quran (Rabwah, 1962)

(iv) Khadim Rahman Nuri, The Running Commentary of the Holy Quran with under-bracket comments (Shillong, 1964)

(v) Firozuddin Ruhi, The Quran (Karachi, 1965)

Apart from the Qadiyanis, Christian missionaries have been the most active non-Muslim translators of the Quran. As already noted, origins of this inglorious tradition may be traced back to the anti-Islamic motives of the missionaries.

Small wonder, then that these ventures are far from being a just translation, replete as they are with frequent transpositions, omissions, unaccountable liberties and unpardonable faults.

A very crude specimen of the Orientalist-missionary approach to the Quran is found in Alexander Ross's The Alcoran of Mahomet translated out of Arabique into French, by the Sieur Du Ryer...And newly Englished, for the satisfaction for all that desire to look into the Turkish vanities (London, 1649).

In translating the Quran, the intention of Ross, a chaplain of King Charles I, was: 'I thought good to bring it to their colors, that so viewing thine enemies in their full body, thou must the better prepare to encounter...his Alcoran.'

In the same rabidly anti-Islamic vein are the two appendices in the work entitled as (a) 'A Needful Caveat or Admonition, for them who desire to know what use may be made of or if there be danger in reading the Alcoran' (pp. 406 20) and 'The Life and Death of Mahomet: the Prophet of the Turks and author of the Alcoran' (pp. 395-405).

George Sale, a lawyer brought out his The Koran, commonly called The Al Koran of Mohammed (London, 1734), which has been the most popular English translation. Sale's exhaustive 'Preliminary Discourse', dealing mainly with Sira and the Quran, betrays his deep hostility towards Islam and his missionary intent in that he suggests the rules to be observed for 'the conversion of Mohammedans' (q.v.).

As to the translation itself, it abounds in numerous instances of omission, distortion and interpolations.

Dissatisfied with Sale's work, J.M. Rodwell, Rector of St. Ethelberga, London, produced his translation entitled The Koran (London, 1861). Apart from hurling all sorts of wild and nasty allegations against the Prophet and the Quran in the Preface, Rodwell is guilty of having invented the so-called chronological Sura order of the Quran. Nor is his translation free from grave mistakes of translation and his own fanciful interpretations in the notes.

E.H. Palmer, a Cambridge scholar, was entrusted with the preparation of a new translation of the Quran for Max Muller's Sacred Books of the East series. Accordingly, his translation, The Quran, appeared in London in 1880. As to the worth of Palmer's translation, reference may be made to A. R. Nykl's article, 'Notes on E.H. Palmer's The Quran', published in the Journal of the American Oriental Society, 56 (1936) pp. 77-84 in which no less than 65 instances of omission and mistranslation in Palmer's work have been pointed out.

Richard Bell, Reader of Arabic, University of Edinburgh, and an acknowledged Orientalist produced a translation of the Quran with special reference to its Sura order, as is evident from the title of his work, The Quran translated with a critical rearrangement of the Surahs (Edinburgh, 1937-39). In addition to describing the Prophet as the author of the Quran, Bell also believes that the Quran in its present form was 'actually written by Muhammad himself' (p. vi). In rearranging the Sura order of the Quran, Bell, in fact, makes a thorough mess of the traditional arrangement and tries to point out 'alterations substitutions and derangements in the text.

A.J. Arberry, a renowned Orientalist and Professor of Arabic at the Universities of London and Cambridge, has been, so far, the latest non-Muslim translator of the Quran.

Arberry's The Koran Interpreted (London, 1957) no doubt stands out above the other English renderings by non-Muslims in terms of both its approach and quality. Nonetheless, it is not altogether free from mistakes of omission and mistranslation, such as in Al' Imran 111:43, Nisa' IV: 72, 147 and 157, Ma'ida V: 55 and 71, An'am VI: 20, 105, A'raf VII: 157, 158 and 199, Anfal VIII: 17, 29, 41, 59, Yunus X: 88, Hud XI: 30 and 46 and Yusuf XII: 61.

N.J. Dawood is perhaps the only Jew to have translated the Quran into English. Available in the Penguin edition, Dawood's translation, The Koran (London, 1956) is perhaps the most widely circulated non-Muslim English translation of the Quran. The author's bias against Islam is readily observable in the Introduction. Apart form adopting an unusual Sura order in his translation, Dawood is guilty also of having mistranslated the Quran in places such as Baqara II:9 and A'raf VII:31, etc.

No doubt, the peculiar circumstances of history which brought the Quran into contact with the English language have left their imprint on the non-Muslim as well as the Muslim bid to translate it. The results and achievements of their efforts leave a lot to be desired.

Unlike, for instance, major Muslim languages such as Persian, Turkish and Urdu, which have thoroughly exhausted indigenous linguistic and literary resources to meet the scholarly and emotional demands of the task, the prolific resources of the universal medium of English have not been fully employed in the service of the Quran.

The Muslim Scripture is yet to find a dignified and faithful expression in the English language that matches the majesty and grandeur of the original. The currents of history, however, seem to be in favor of such a development. Even English is acquiring a native Muslim character and it is only a matter of time before we have a worthy translation of the Quran in that tongue.

Till them, the Muslim student should judiciously make use of Pickthall, A. Yusuf Ali, Asad and Irving, Even Arberry's stylistic qualities must not be ignored. Ultimately, of course, the Muslim should try to discover the original and not allow himself to be lost in a maze of translations and interpretations.

(Originally printed in The Muslim World Book Review, Vol. 7, No. 4 Summer 1987)[/color:3463595ed3]

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me