phill01 wrote:from my understanding from “The Cat” is that it hasn’t been translated at all ?.
Cat posted several meanings from Arabic sources which gave a few meanings being:
1: Worn down.
2: To insist on something from an adversary.
Out of them, parting from free-minds, I kept #2 since it better fits the context of the Hudaibiya negociations.
phill01 wrote:Here is an excellent article on the Makkata issue...
I’m sure “The Cat” will savour this one
Indeed, thanks phill01. I kept this:
the Quran doesn't fall into the category of books that use conventional standardized spelling,
which can be seen from one Quranic text to another, gives support to the ideas that Mecca
was never made a place of importance in the Quran, and where the word is mentioned it has
other meaning. It also give support to the idea that bakkah is not the other name for Mecca
and has meaning in Arabic that grammatically fits towards understanding it as 'a cut above the
rest' or 'in distinction' and that Ramadan has alternative Arabic meaning and can grammatically
mean 'season of constant or intense heat'. All these understandings can all be justified using
valid grammatical principles and are therefore sound understandings.
In fact, what we're slowly discovering is that most Islamic religious terminologies have been twisted out of the Koran
(including Zakat, Ruku, etc), indeed corrupting its real message, to fit the Islamic Pharisees' agenda, to build a religion,
world apart from the true Koranic meanings, much like the twisting of 'bibatni makkata' or 'Ramadan' for that matter!
In short, secular words have been given a religious twist throughout the tafsirs/hadiths...
But it'll be a Herculean task to reverse the traditional blend, right here defended by snb!
And to do so, no doubt, we absolutely NEED the insights from the Koraners 'apostates'.
The Deception of the Koranic 'proper names'
Or, its revised parent in Resource Center: The Koranic Deceptive 'Proper Names' (still on-going).