What is the universal criteria to separate words in Arabic of Quran? My computer program uses "empty space character" to separate words and count them. Is that "always" correct rule for this? For example is this "va huva" one word or two words in 9:129? وَهُوَ

Some explanatory books, such as Nayl al-Awtar by Imam al-Shawkani, Mirqat al-Mafatih by al-Mulla Ali al-Qari, and the explanation of al-Mishkat by al-Tibi, have interpreted the hadith of Safiyyah (radi Allahu 'anha), when she said that the Prophet (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) "bana biha", to mean that he built a new tent because of her or with her. Is it valid to interpret the hadith of Aisha (radi Allahu 'anha): "bana bi Rasul Allah", to mean that he built a tent because of her or with her? My question is: is this interpretation acceptable from the perspective of the Arabic language?

There's a range of translations of Quran 54:17 ; here are some examples: > And in truth We have made the Qur'an easy to remember; but is there any that remembereth? -- M. M. Pickthall > We have made it easy to learn lessons from the Quran. Is there anyone who would receive admonition? -- Wahiduddin Khan > And indeed, We have made the Qur'an easy for direction and guidance, but is there anyone who will take advice? -- Dr. Mohammad Tahir-ul-Qadri > We have really made this Qur'an easy (to understand)! Is anyone there to heed? -- Dr. Munir Munshey It seems there's two major interpretations of this ayat: - The Qur'an is easy to understand. This could be in order to help everyone, despite their level of education. I've also seen it argued that the repetitive nature of the Qur'an is evidence to support this interpretation. > The Qur'an's guidance for man’s conduct are plain and easy to understand and act upon... > ...Masha Allah, how easy Allah has made it for us to memorise the Qur’an and increase our rewards. -- Productive Muslim - Admonishion in the Qur'an is easy to understand. "Do good and get closer to paradise. Do bad and get closer to punishment". > Some people have misconstrued the words yassarnal- Quran to mean that the Quran is an easy Book; no knowledge is required to understand it so much so that a person even without the knowledge of the Arabic language, can write a commentary on it, and can deduce any injunctions he likes from its verses independent of the Hadith and Islamic Law, whereas the context in which these words occur, indicates that they are meant to make the people realize this: One means of the admonition are the dreadful torments that descended upon the rebellious nations, and the other means is this Quran, which guides you to the right path by argument and instruction. -- Islamic Studies It's unclear which is correct. (And I cannot exclude the possibility that both of these interpretations are simultaneously correct.) **Question**: Should Qur'an 54:17 be interpreted as meaning the Qur'an is intended to be simple to understand? Answering this is probably going to require familiarity with the Arabic: > وَلَقَدْ يَسَّرْنَا الْقُرْآنَ لِلذِّكْرِ فَهَلْ مِن مُّدَّكِرٍ

The 4th verse of Surah al-Yusuf has two verbs رَاَیتُ which means I saw: > اِذ قالَ یوسُفُ لِأَبیهِ یا اَبَتی إِنّی **رَأَیتُ** اَحَدَ عَشَرَ کَوکَبا وَالشَّمسَ وَالقَمَرَ **رَأَیتُ**هُم لی ساجِدین Translation: When Joseph told his father, oh my father! I just saw eleven stars and the Sun and the Moon bowed down to me. Why is there an excessive رَأَیتُ here?

I know the Arabic script, and can read the Quran. But I have no understanding of what I'm reading. What is the best route to learning Classical Arabic? Most of the guides I've seen (in the UK) deal only with modern Arabic. Should I learn this first, or can I go straight into learning the Classical Arabic of the Quran? My main reason for learning Quranic Arabic, is that its poetic force simply does not come through in English. The translations I have looked at are, poetically speaking, dull. Which is a pity. And I don't see that changing any time soon.

That's it. Not much more detail in the question. If the answer could include usage in a sentence, that would be helpful.

Salam aleikum, Regarding elongation marks: Do scholars allow to have different categories of elongation marks in Quran ? In terms of pronounciation, it is pronounced exactly the same. What I mean by it in an example (Pay attention to ٱلۡعَٰلَمِينَ): Surah Al Fatiha, Verse 2: https://m.wordofallah.com/1 and https://quran.com/1 > ٱلۡحَمۡدُ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ ٱلۡعَٰلَمِينَ https://myislam.org/surah-fatiha-translation/ and my Quran home: > الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ After the ‘Ayn there is a small Alif in the first one and in the second one there is a big Alif. Is this allowed by scholars, because I taught the orthography of the bigger letters was always the same (without the harakat and the smaller elongation marks etc.).

As the title says. I know no Arabic, but want to start with learning. I am mostly looking for recommended literary works or courses. God bless.

I am an American who recently converted. But I only know English and I have a Qur'an that is English only. I have memorized most of the everyday sayings in Arabic. But I was wondering if I have to learn Arabic to be perceived as a true Muslim to Allah, instead of a hypocrite. Should I just memorize enough Arabic to learn the Qur'an or can I still pray and read the Qur'an in English and that be okay?

Assalamu aliakum. I am 12 years old. I learned to recite the Quran when I was very young. But a few years back I stopped reciting quran and now I don't know how to read Arabic, I have forgotten. I don't want to tell my parents because I am ashamed and also they will be angry with me. Is there a website where I can learn to read Arabic for free? Please help Jazakallahu Khair

Assalamu alaikum. I am learning how to read Arrabic alphabets and how to read Quran. I'm slightly confused with something: In the first verse of Sura Al-Faatiha, the spelling suggests the following reading > Bismi Allahi alrahmani alraheemi. But the actual reading that I heard from many recitations are like > Bismi-lla(h)i-lrahmani-raheem. So the 'al' was connected really fast, almost indistinguishable to my ear. And the 'i' in the end of 'alraheemi' was omitted. ____ My second example is the third verse of Al-Faatiha, which looks to me like > Maliki yawmi aldiyni But in the recitations it was like > Maliki yawmi-diyn So again 'al' was connected really fast and 'i' in the end was omitted. ____ Please help me understand the correct way to read the suras (I guess the word is tajweed), or point me toward some references. Thank you very much.

Which scholars maintain that Arabic was the language of Adam A"S?

In Surah Nisa, verse 136, Allah says: Before the first stop (jeem), Allah describes the Qur'an with "nazzala" (نَزَّلَ), while he describes the previous books with "anzala" (أَنزَلَ). Both of these come from the same root verb, nazala, which means "to descend, to go down." The first is baab two, which is a more severe form, while the second looks like the form used often when you cause something to happen (eg. make something descend). But my Arabic is rusty. What exactly is the difference of meaning of these two verbs, and what's the implication here?

I am looking for a professional answer to the following question. I have read books claiming that Allah is not a "God." One of the authors is famous. While technically analyzing the statements of the author, I need a certain level of knowledge in Arabic. **Question:** >If we translate the phrase of the Kalimat al-Tawhid ("La ilaha illa Allah") as "There is no God, only Allah," then, if Allah is definitively not a god, the particle illa (إِلَّا) should technically indicate an exception munqati' (disconnected exception) rather than muttasil (connected exception). My question is purely technical, not philosophical: If Allah is definitively not a God, then in the phrase Kalimat al-Tawhid, is the exception particle munqati' or muttasil? I seek an **authoritative** answer, as I couldn't find a definitive explanation anywhere online. I am aware that "Allah" is a proper noun, whereas "God" is not. Therefore, I understand that the name "Allah" cannot be translated as "God." However, this does not necessarily mean that "Allah" is definitively not a "God". --- Here is a quote from the author: >The Meaning Of The Word Of Unity The Word of Unity: La ilaha illallah, comprises the foundation of the Islamic faith. > >Taken literally, it means: There is no god, only Allah. > >If we evaluate its meaning… La means No, ilaha means god, i.e. there is no god. > >Note that, the first part of the word of unity is a denunciation: there is no god, there is no deity, after which it establishes the realityilla Allah, there is ONLY ALLAH! > >It is of paramount importance that we understand how big a mistake it would be to evaluate and translate this statement according to the colloquial language spoken by the Arab population today. > >Let us give an example. The Arabic statement: La rajulun illa Ali can be translated literally as: ‘There is no real man except/but Ali’ or ‘There is no man like Ali’ or ‘Among the men none are Ali’s alike’ (note that all of these statements denote there are in fact other men, but they are not like Ali). However, when the word illa is used in conjunction with the word ALLAH it does not mean ‘a god like Allah’, that is, it should not be understood as ‘there other gods, but none are like Allah’, as the very meaning denoted by the word ALLAH invalidates this supposition from the onset. > >Just as the auxiliary verb was (khaane), when used in conjunction with Allah, loses its general meaning and is taken as the present simple tense, when the word except (illa) appears next to the word Allah it also loses its general connotation and is taken to mean only. Here is an example: > >KhaanALLAhu gafurur rahiyma cannot be translated as ‘Allah was Ghafur and Rahim’as the qualities denoted by the Names of Allah cannot be subject to time; they are ever present and ever effective. > >Similarly, illa Allah cannot mean except Allah, which denotes the existence of others, but must be understood as only Allah! > >The compositional qualities of the One to which the word Allah refers, does not accept the existence of another, especially that beside itself. > >Hence, khaane, illa and all other expressions that denote time and (other) existence must be construed appropriate to the meaning of Allah when used in conjunction with it. Otherwise, it will inevitably result in the conception of a god beyond! > >Now examining the Word of Unity: There is no God, there is only Allah in light of this consideration, the first message that we are given is There is no god. Only after this definite denunciation we are told ILLA ALLAH. As explained above, because the word illa is used besides the word Allah the only correct construal of this statement can be ONLY ALLAH as opposed to except Allah or but Allah for there is no other being in existence to which Allah can be compared to or excluded from! Therefore, in order for the UNITY and ONENESS (non-duality) of the Islamic faith to be communicated correctly, the Word of Unity must be understood and translated accurately. > >Indeed, there is only Allah, and Allah is not a god to be deified, idolized or worshipped, as per the message ‘there is no god’! In fact, Allah isn’t even a god that is beyond man and creation! > >So, what is worship as opposed to servitude? > >To deify or worship something necessitates the existence of a god. That is, the very act of worshipping someone or something means there is a worshipper and one that is worshipped. This leads to duality. There is a you as an individual, and then there is your god who is beyond you, and you worship this god. Clearly, this is an interaction between two parties. We may say then, that worship, in this context, refers to the collection of all the activities that are done in respect to this earthly or heavenly (exterior) God.

I read it somewhere that Muslims must learn Arabic (The language of Islam) I know how to read the Q'uran in Arabic but I don't know how to speak Arabic and I also don't understand a single word that I read in the Q'uran in Arabic without seeing the translation . So tell me do I have to learn the Arabic in spite of the reading.

According to many Islamic sources, Quran 51:47 refers to the expansion of the universe, a phenomenon that has been made known to us in the recent century. > And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander. (51:47) Most of the debate pertaining to this verse is centered on the word 'musioona', and whether it implies an expansion of space in the past, or a continuous & ongoing expansion. **However, how do we know in the first place that the word 'samaa' used in this verse is referring to the greater universe (i.e heaven)?** In the Quran, Allah frequently reminds us of rain coming from the sky, as provision for his creation: > Do you not see that Allah sends down rain from the sky and makes it flow as springs [and rivers] in the earth; .... (39:21) In verses such as these, the term 'samaa' cannot be used to denote the wider universe, but rather the closer regions of Earth's atmosphere to us. Just to clarify, I understand that Arabic words can mean multiple things - 'samaa' can be either "sky" or "heaven"- **but is it possible to know for certain which of these meanings is meant in 51:47 (i.e without using a potential scientific interpretation)?**

In Quran it is mentioned that the bones are covered with muscles in early stage.But in Quran is it flesh(لحم) not muscle(عضلة).Is flesh and muscle in Arabic same or different?Is flesh comprehensive in this case?

Assalamu 'Alaikum dear brothers and sisters A Christian recently argued with me by quoting Al Ahqaf:30 that Prophet (S) had the Original Thaurath in his hands. Here is what he said: > "Let me give you some more proof that the Torah at the time of > Mohammed was the truth, acording to your Prophet. Take for example > Surah Al-Ahqaf verse 30, in your major translations by Muslims. > Take the translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali. It says: "They said, "O > our people, we have heard a book revealed after Moses, confirming what > came before it; it guides (men) to the truth and to a straight path." > Look at the words highlighted above that say "before it." In the > Arabic the words are not "before it." Let's do a word for word > translation, and I leave it to the Arabic reader to be honest to > himself when he reading this word for word translation: Arabic: kaloo > ya kawmana inna sami'ina kitaban unzila ba'd Musa English: they said > O our people we have heard a book revealed after Moses Arabic: > Musadekan Lima Bayna Yadayehe English: confirming what is between his > hands Arabic: Yahdee ela al-hak wa-ela tareekin mustakeem English: > it guides to the truth and to a straight path My point is the un > corrupted BIBLE was in their hands at the time of Mohammed. Where is > the uncorrupted copy of the BIBLE. Why is it that we have copies of > the BIBLE from the &th century and copies from the 4th 3nd the 2nd and > we also have copies from the 10th 12 th an up to today and all say the > same thing. all come from the same manuscripts in Hebrew, Greek and > Aramaic. So I dont have a clue what youare talking about. you are just > repeating what you have been told. I suggest you go study your own > religion first before you comment on a religion you dont know anything > about." I replied like this: > "Here is the right translation. Of Ahqaf:30 > > {They said, "O our people! We have heard a Book revealed after Moses, > confirmation for what is before it: it guides to the Truth and to > Straight Path. } > One thing you said is right.The word-by-word > translation says “What is between its hands”.It is an Arabic idiom for > saying 'In front of' or 'before'.See Al Baqara 66 for Example. > Now you > have quoted Ahqaf:30 and stated that Original Thourath existed at the > time of Prophet Muhammed (S). > My question:Where does it say that > 'Thaurath exist in its original form'? Nowhere.It just says that > Qur'an conforms the Thaurath.It says about the Thaurath,which is > already corrupted. How can you know that the manuscripts you > said,which belongs to 2nd,3rd,4th centuries,etc are not corrupted? > Just have a check at the Great Isaiah Scroll: > http://www.answering-christianity.com/topic_1996.htm " He said: > "You getting your information from answeringchristianuty.com no wonder > you are confused. This guy Osama Abdullah fabricated emails, then had > to admit and apologize. This is your source of information a confessed > liar. A man whi CHRISTIAN PRINCE destroyed in every debate. Wow you > are really lost. Seeing that you cannot read either Arabic or English. > The verse says BETWEEN HIS HANDS that sir means the prophet had the > uncorrupted copy in his hands. The words translated as BEFORE IT > doesnot mean that it is a deception the proper translation of BAYNA > YADAYEHE. Is BETWEEN HIS HANDS. Your lieing schollar neglected to tell > you what the arabic really says. My next question would be, WHY WOULD > YOU HAVE TO LIE TO PROVE THE BOOK OF UTHMAN TO BE TRUE?." As you see,he didn't accept what I said: "The word-by-word translation says "What is between its hands".It is an Arabic idiom for saying 'In front of' or 'before'.See Al Baqara 66 for Example." In Holy Qur'an 2:65-66 Allah says: > بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ > > { وَلَقَدْ عَلِمْتُمُ الَّذِينَ اعْتَدَوْا مِنكُمْ فِي السَّبْتِ > فَقُلْنَا لَهُمْ كُونُوا قِرَدَةً خَاسِئِينَ > > And you had already known about those who transgressed among you > concerning the sabbath, and We said to them, "Be monkeys, despised." > > فَجَعَلْنَاهَا نَكَالًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهَا وَمَا خَلْفَهَا > وَمَوْعِظَةً لِّلْمُتَّقِينَ >And We made it a deterrent punishment > for those who were present and those who succeeded [them] and a lesson > for those who fear Allah. } The verse 66 says “Bayna Yadayha” which means 'between her hands'.But it is absurd to translate it like that. Similarly, there are other verses like: > {And it is He who sends the winds as good tidings before His mercy, > and We send down from the sky pure water}(Holy Qur'an 25:48) Now,before replying to that Kafir,I just want to conform my point: In Arabic,'Between the hands' means means 'before' and 'in front of'.It is an idiom or figurative speech. I need conformation for that Please say if I am right or wrong. _____ ### EDIT ### P.S: Our debate was of course about the preservation the Bible/Thaurath/Injeel. I am preparing answers to give him.I can get that also from the answering-christianity blog(http://www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php) But my real doubt is,as the title of my question says,the meaning of 'bayna yadayhi' or 'between his hands'(Please reread the last part of my question).I asked it here because I thought there would be people knowing more Arabic. I hope I will get a good reply from here. Thank you. Salam, S.H.O

Bismillahir Rahmanir Rahim. Alhamdulillahi rabbil-'alamin. Was-Salatu was-Salam 'ala Sayyidina wa Azimina, Wa Habibi Qulubina wa Shafii Nufusina, Abul Qasim Muhammad. Wa 'ala Ahli Bayti tayyibina tahireen. ---------- It seems to me that "Amen" is originally not Arabic word. Meybe it was adopted into Arabic from Hebrew? So the question is, **Is "Amen" originally Arabic word?** Or, **was "Amen" originally Arabic word at the time of the Prophet Muhammad SAW?** Wikipedia says it is originally Hebrew word. I hope experts of Arabic language will respond to my inquiry.

A Person doesn’t understand what the brackets mean in the Quran, for example in [47:19]: > فَٱعْلَمْ أَنَّهُۥ لَآ إِلَـٰهَ إِلَّا ٱللَّهُ وَٱسْتَغْفِرْ لِذَنۢبِكَ وَلِلْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَٱلْمُؤْمِنَـٰتِ ۗ وَٱللَّهُ يَعْلَمُ مُتَقَلَّبَكُمْ وَمَثْوَىٰكُمْ > > So, know ˹well, O Prophet,˺ that there is no god **˹worthy of worship˺** except Allah. And seek forgiveness for your shortcomings and for ˹the sins of˺ the believing men and women. For Allah ˹fully˺ knows your movements and places of rest ˹O people˺. > > Translated by Dr. Mustafa Khattab, The Clear Quran > >https://quran.com/en/muhammad/19 How can I explain to the person that the brackets which state (none worthy of worship), do not mean the that there are gods besides Allah.