The Quran needs to be better translated.

  • Thread starter Thread starter QuranStudy
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 50
  • Views Views 10K
Just from the first few responses i saw the word wali, now that could apparently mean friend,protector,leader,or military ally.
If one word alone could have so many different meanings then how are we supposed to learn Gods message?

If indeed the Qu'ran is what it claims to be?

I remember having a debate about the meaning of another verse with Muslims, and nobody could say what the verse meant.

It said either wives or companions
Which gave a different meaning to the entire verse.
Don't recall which one it was exactly, but it had to do with hell and a sinner being brought there with his companions or wives after they die.
Which seemed a rather significant difference.
 
Cherub said:
Just from the first few responses i saw the word wali, now that could apparently mean friend,protector,leader,or military ally.
If one word alone could have so many different meanings then how are we supposed to learn Gods message?

If indeed the Qu'ran is what it claims to be?

I remember having a debate about the meaning of another verse with Muslims, and nobody could say what the verse meant.

It said either wives or companions
Which gave a different meaning to the entire verse.
Don't recall which one it was exactly, but it had to do with hell and a sinner being brought there with his companions or wives after they die.
Which seemed a rather significant difference.
Click to expand...

When it says that a girl needs a Wali to get married, are they talking about a wife, companion.. etc... no, they are talking about the gardian/leader of the girl.

Kidman
 
Kidman said:
When it says that a girl needs a Wali to get married, are they talking about a wife, companion.. etc... no, they are talking about the gardian/leader of the girl.

Kidman
Click to expand...

So ok..if we take your version of Wali then all Muslims should leave the countries where they live under a non-Muslim leader.
Which doesn't seem to make much sense to me.
 
What about a non-Muslim boss?
Is that allowed?

I mean if you have so many different meanings to the word.
Is a Muslim allowed to have non-Muslim security guards?
 
Cherub said:
So ok..if we take your version of Wali then all Muslims should leave the countries where they live under a non-Muslim leader.
Which doesn't seem to make much sense to me.
Click to expand...

Actually yes... But since they let you practice your religion freely in most countries, then it is ok to remain in places like the U.S. My sheikh even said himself... that it would be haram for him to live in the U.S if there wasn't anyone for him to teach islam to. But since they let you practice religion freely, and you can spread the teachings of Islam and the word of Allah here, it is acceptable to live here.

Kidman
 
Cherub said:
What about a non-Muslim boss?
Is that allowed?

I mean if you have so many different meanings to the word.
Is a Muslim allowed to have non-Muslim security guards?
Click to expand...

Non-Muslim boss, if they segregate you in any way, or don't let you practice your religion (like to do prayers or for women to wear hijab), then no, your not allowed.

As far as having non-Muslim security guards, these people are working for you, so that doesn't apply.

Kidman
 
Cherub and kidman, you two are going off topic............. :-)
 
alaikum assalam

it is that I have been contemplating this thread during a week without access to a computer

It occurred to me that it has not been defined where is the difference between the responsilbilty of any person whom is accessing translations of Qur'an, to find the best possible measure by which to access; and the responsiblities of those whom provide translations, to provide the very best translations.

Both parties must be held responsible and neither should accord any blame to the other.

Yet it is also the case that there have been translations made by non-believers whom want such to work to only thier own purposes. At the risk of seeming to be a hypocrite, since I my self have been highlighting the issue of faulted translations, it is that I believe that those whom are most inclined towards pointing a finger in blame about mistranslations, are most likely also to prefer the mistranslations, if not prove to be responsible for.

When we live in a world in which Arabic speakers have explained that we need Arabic language for them to be adequately able to teach us Qur'an; then we must assume two things. First that our own teaching of English is inadequate, if not the language itself; and second, that we must seek out all available translations and undertake comparative research. Any English student of Qur'an who is not so inclined is a pure fool since we are all informed of the importance of Arabic.

I believe that, in the same way that Aboriginal Australians are insistent that we must only speak to others in our own languages and they will learn if they need to/want to/ are enabled to; that the full comprehension of Qur'an is quite by nature accorded.

While I sit here listening to recitations at the computer without any comprehension of Arabic, and like reading at least two translations, if not three, if I am going to read it at all: I simply can not regard the matter of any translation that is limiting, as worthy of faulting unless there has been sourced evidence of a faulted purpose in the act of translation, and with which every aspect of an entire translation accords.

That is all that I have further mu'asalam.
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top