I am considering a non-Arabic (Slavic) name for my baby: Damir / Daamir. In Slavic usage, this name is reported to have a meaning related to peace, and in Turkish it may have meanings related to heart (or similar positive connotations). My concern arises when the name is written or pronounced in Arabic -> ضامِر It closely resembles an Arabic word that may carry a negative or undesirable meaning, such as “slim” or “weak.” Because of this, I am worried about whether choosing such a name would be Islamically permissible. My questions are: Is it permissible in Islam to use a non-Arabic name for a child if, when pronounced or written in Arabic, it resembles an Arabic word with an undesirable meaning? Does the Arabic resemblance have any legal or religious effect on the permissibility of the name? Are there any guidelines regarding non-Arabic names whose meanings differ across languages? I want to make sure the name is appropriate and does not carry any negative implications Islamically. Guidance would be appreciated.

In this Iranian website it is stated that the word کَوکَب means star in the holy Quran: > (فَلَمَّا جَنَّ عَلَیْهِ‌ اللَّیْلُ رَای‌ کَوْکَباً) «چون شب او را فرا گرفت ستاره‌ای دید.» Surat al-An'am, verse 6. Translation of the Persian translation (pardon me please if a little incorrect): When the night cast on him, he saw a star. But doesn't star translate to نَجم and اَختَر in Arabic? We have also verses that contain نَجم with the meaning of star: > (وَ النَّجْمِ‌ اِذا هَوی‌) قسم به ستاره آن زمان که فرود می آید (Swear to star, when it comes down) Surat al-Najm, verse 1. I also searched for مِرّیخ in Arabic Wikipedia : > المِرِّيخ أو الكوكب الأحمر هو الكوكب الرابع من حيث البعد عن الشمس في النظام الشمسي... Ttanslation: Mars or the red planet is the fourth planet in the aspect of distance from the Sun in the solar system... کَوکَب clearly means planet here. I am confused. Does کَوکَب mean star or planet in the holy Quran? Maybe it meant star at the time of Prophet Muhammad (P.B.U.H)? But there is also a Quran verse (in the surah al-Yusuf) that کَوکَب sounds planet to me in! > اِذ قالَ یوسُفُ لِأبیهِ یا اَبَتی إنّی رَأیتُ اَحَدَ عَشَرَ کَوکَبا وَالشَّمسَ وَالقَمَرَ رَأیتُهُم لی ساجِدین Translation: When Joseph told his father: "oh father, I saw (in my dream) that eleven planets(?) and the Sun and the Moon were bowing down to me". I can't think کَوکَب means star here! Because the Sun is a star itself and also, it's always the planets that come after the Sun. The verse also calls the Moon.

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?

We know that when we speak about more than one of a thing in Arabic we should pluralize the noun just like in English. For example, three houses (ثلاثة منازل instead of ثلاثة منزل). But in 12:4 (Surah al-Yusuf, verse 4) we have احد عشر کوکب instead of احد عشر کواکب: > اِذ قالَ یوسُفُ لِأبیهِ یا اَبَتی إنّی رَأیتُ اَحَدَ عَشَرَ کَوکَبا وَ الشَّمسَ وَ القَمَرَ رَأیتُهُم لی ساجِدین Why does that not follow the rule?

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

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?

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?