So It just occurred to me that I should make sure the translator have my belief. Sunni Islam..Very Conservative.
I have 2 Quran.
One is translation by Maulana Muhhammad Ali. Who I looked up and has some way way way different views about Jesus and the Cross.I read that he had Ahmadiyya beliefs. Which I am not a follower of.
The other translation is by Abdullah Yusuf Ali.I really don't know much about except that he is Sunni.
There is a translated version in English I'm very interested in..but I dont remember who the translator was..except that he had deep relation and seal of approval from KSA.
The important thing to remember is no Translation is the Quran. At best it is only an approximation. also keep in mind any translation is going to carry the author's interpretation.
Until you can read it in Arabic it is best to use at least 3 translations. My personal recommendations are Abdullah Ali (But use caution in his commentaries, Ali was not a scholar and some of his commentaries do not agree with many scholars) Marmaduke Pikthall and any other translation approved by the KSA
Any translations approved by them have been found to be acceptable translations with minimal interpretation. It is impossible to accurately translate Arabic into any other language. The best that is possible are approximations. The problems arise when translators go by their interpretations and stray away from translating.
New translations are needed often as languages change. Especially in the English language. When the Yusuf Ali and Pickthal translation first came out they were very accurate. However, the English in them is now archaic and many English words used no longer have the same meaning they did in the 1900s.
Any translations approved by them have been found to be acceptable translations with minimal interpretation. It is impossible to accurately translate Arabic into any other language. The best that is possible are approximations. The problems arise when translators go by their interpretations and stray away from translating.
New translations are needed often as languages change. Especially in the English language. When the Yusuf Ali and Pickthal translation first came out they were very accurate. However, the English in them is now archaic and many English words used no longer have the same meaning they did in the 1900s.
It is the same principle with the King James version of the Bible. That is the version we always used when I was in Christian schools and churches as a kid. I always thought it a bit odd that we used what amounted to a Shakespearean version of the Bible. Like you said, some of the classical words now have different meanings (and spellings) in modern English, so I prefer a newer translation when I read the Bible.
I did obtain a copy of the Yusuf Ali version of the Qu'ran a couple of months ago and have been reading through it. So far it seems fairly modern (not a lot of archaic words) from what I have found. But if there is a better translation, I would definitely be interested in finding it.
It is the same principle with the King James version of the Bible. That is the version we always used when I was in Christian schools and churches as a kid. I always thought it a bit odd that we used what amounted to a Shakespearean version of the Bible. Like you said, some of the classical words now have different meanings (and spellings) in modern English, so I prefer a newer translation when I read the Bible.
With bible, they cannot be called translations. All bible are "versions".
How can you have translation when there's no original?
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks