17:36

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam All

If you visit any Quran alone web site you will notice something very strange, most Quran aloners understand 17:36 wrong, it seems they took it as an idol for every argument they present, let me bring the verse in here and see for yourselves what it means and how the Quran aloners wrongly understand it:

وَلاَ تَقْفُ مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ إِنَّ السَّمْعَ وَالْبَصَرَ وَالْفُؤَادَ كُلُّ أُولئِكَ كَانَ عَنْهُ مَسْؤُولاً (36)

[The Quran ; 17:36]

The verse is translated as follow :

YUSUFALI: And pursue not that of which thou hast no knowledge; for every act of hearing, or of seeing or of (feeling in) the heart will be enquired into (on the Day of Reckoning).

PICKTHAL: (O man), follow not that whereof thou hast no knowledge. Lo! the hearing and the sight and the heart - of each of these it will be asked.

SHAKIR: And follow not that of which you have not the knowledge; surely the hearing and the sight and the heart, all of these, shall be questioned about that.
[The Quran ; 17:36]
-> The key word that is causing all this confusion is the Arabic word : '???? تَقْفُ'????, pronounce as '???????????Taqifu'????, or '???????????Taqiffu'???? with a shaddah '???????????stress'???? on the letter Fa, this means the word has two meanings:

1) '???????????Taqifu'????, without a shaddah on the Fa = '???????????to stand up'????
2) '???????????Taqiffu'???? with a shaddah '???????????stress'???? on the letter Fa = '???????????Cause to follow'????

A typical Quran aloner understanding to 17:36 is like this:

You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain, and you are responsible for using them.
[17:36 translation by Rashad Khalifa, http://www.submission.org/suras/sura17.htm

After studying the above translation which many Quran aloners use as an argument, there will be no doubt that its supporters are really confused

What I have noted that, the supporters for this understanding never provided any evidence other than this:

1) The same word '???????????Qaffa'???? was used in another 3 locations which means to follow
2) A few English translations showed the Arabic word '???????????T Q F'???? as '???????????to follow'???? as seen above by the 3 most popular translators

Looking closely at their evidences we will see clearly that both have no merit and both can't be admissible to support their argument,

If we consider the first meaning '???????????Taqifu'????, without a shaddah on the Fa = '???????????to stand up'???? then 17:36 will be translated literally as follow:

You shall not STAND UP to any thing you lack knowledge of,. The hearing, the seeing and the hearts are all responsibilities.

The above means metaphorically as commonly known within the Arabs

You shall not ARGUE to any thing you lack knowledge of,. the hearing, the seeing and the hearts are all responsibilities.

This translation makes great sense indeed, because it is a positive message that encourages people to gain knowledge about anything they want to argue about it, IF YOU ARGUE WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE THEN A SIN IS COMMITTED ACCORDING TO 17:36, but if you have the knowledge then it is ok to argue about it and no sin will be committed, if you lack the knowledge about something and you want to argue about it then, 17:36 tells you to go and gain knowledge about it then come back and argue.

The second half of the verse will fit like a glove for this first half understanding because whatever you will say that you heard or saw will be held against you by Allah on the account day

If we look at Rashad Khalifa translation we can see easily how flawed it is :

Rashad Khalifa translated:
'????You shall not accept any information,'????,

Ahmed says:
The Arabic verse never suggested any acceptance of any information, even metaphorically

Rashad Khalifa translated:
'????, unless you verify it for yourself'????,

Ahmed says:
The Arabic verse never suggested any verification of any information by any one including the self, even metaphorically. In essence the above two combined sentences by Rashad Khaifa :
You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself should equal '???? وَلاَ تَقْفُ مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ'????, wow, I'm still shaking my head to where the hell R K got this translation from, I actually started to doubt that he was a native Arabic speaker.

For the rest of the verse:

Rashad Khalifa translated:
'????I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain'????

Ahmed says:
The verse never mentioned that Allah has given us hearing, eyesight and the brain, in fact the verse never ever mentioned brains, I guess someone needs one in here, all this bit from 17:36 '???? إِنَّ السَّمْعَ وَالْبَصَرَ وَالْفُؤَادَ'???? means: '????The hearing, the seeing and the heart'????, nothing more and nothing less, of course on its own it makes no sense, that is what the rest of the verse is for, it is sort of information regarding those three things that we have:

Rashad Khalifa translated:
'???? , and you are responsible for using them.'????

Ahmed says:
hmmmm, not sure also where he got this silly translation from, the rest of the verse simply telling us a piece of important information about '???????????The hearing, the seeing and the heart'????, that they are responsibilities, for example, don't say you have heard while you did not hear and don't say you have seen while you didn't see, in essence , '???????????DO NOT ARGUE IF YOU LACK KNOWLEDGE'????

Obviously the translation presented by R K was only to serve one purpose, to facilitate the made up code 19 as a verification method to everything in the Quran including dropping two verses from it, he cared less to present an accurate translation to guide those who lack Arabic and can't understand the Quran, obviously many fell in his trap, may Allah save them and guide them back to the right path

If we consider the second meaning '???????????Taqiffu'???? with a shaddah '???????????stress'???? on the letter Fa = '???????????to cause to follow'????, we see that the three translators mentioned earlier based it on that meaning but yet something is missing or at least vague in the context as I will explain later, the word 'Taqiffu' means '???????????to cause something to follow something'????, it never means '???????????something to follow something'????, the cause by an entity is a must here.

Let's have a look at all the three locations where '???????????Qa FFa Ya'???? with a shaddah on the Fa, appeared and see what it means within the context:

YUSUFALI: We gave Moses the Book and followed him up with a succession of messengers; We gave Jesus the son of Mary Clear (Signs) and strengthened him with the holy spirit. Is it that whenever there comes to you a messenger with what ye yourselves desire not, ye are puffed up with pride?- Some ye called impostors, and others ye slay!

PICKTHAL: And verily We gave unto Moses the Scripture and We caused a train of messengers to follow after him, and We gave unto Jesus, son of Mary, clear proofs (of Allah's sovereignty), and We supported him with the Holy spirit. Is it ever so, that, when there cometh unto you a messenger (from Allah) with that which ye yourselves desire not, ye grow arrogant, and some ye disbelieve and some ye slay?

SHAKIR: And most certainly We gave Musa the Book and We sent messengers after him one after another; and We gave Isa, the son of Marium, clear arguments and strengthened him with the holy spirit, What! whenever then a messenger came to you with that which your souls did not desire, you were insolent so you called some liars and some you slew.
[The Quran ; 2:87]

وَلَقَدْ آتَيْنَا مُوسَى الْكِتَابَ وَقَفَّيْنَا مِن بَعْدِهِ بِالرُّسُلِ وَآتَيْنَا عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَأَيَّدْنَاهُ بِرُوحِ الْقُدُسِ أَفَكُلَّمَا جَاءكُمْ رَسُولٌ بِمَا لاَ تَهْوَى أَنفُسُكُمُ اسْتَكْبَرْتُمْ فَفَرِيقاً كَذَّبْتُمْ وَفَرِيقاً تَقْتُلُونَ (87)

-> What can I say, well not much indeed, let's just look at the Arabic word '???? وَقَفَّيْنَا'????and see for ourselves:

YUSUFALI: '???????????We gave Moses the Book and followed him up with a succession of messengers'????

PICKTHAL: '????and We caused a train of messengers to follow after him'????

SHAKIR: '????and We sent messengers after him one after another'????

-> It seems to me that Yusuf Ali suffers from a very low IQ, we can see that the other two translated the Arabic word as an action that is caused by Allah, '???????????We Caused to Follow'???? and '???????????We Sent'????, but mister Yusuf Ali said it like this '???????????and followed him'????, come on, give me a break will ya?, what sense is that? It sounds like Allah is following someone !!

See if I'm following a friend on a path, then I should say I followed that person, but if I told my son to follow that person then I have to say it that I caused my son to follow that person because THE ACTION IS REFERING TO ME NOT TO MY SON and the action here was to cause other prophets to come one after another, this was understood perfectly by the other 2 translators PICKTHAL & SHAKIR , the meaning was clear to them within the context, '???????????Allah caused other messengers to follow Moses'????, see '???????????Caused something to follow something'????

Let's test 17:36 under the understanding that Taqiffu means '???????????to cause something to follow something'????

وَلاَ تَقْفُ مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ إِنَّ السَّمْعَ وَالْبَصَرَ وَالْفُؤَادَ كُلُّ أُولئِكَ كَانَ عَنْهُ مَسْؤُولاً (36)


The translation should be like this:

Do Not cause to follow what you lack knowledge in,

Oh please give me another break will ya, What sense is that?

If it says '???????????Do Not Cause '????something" to follow what you lack knowledge in'????, I can accept it despite its lack of sense, but there is no third party mentioned in the verse, it is God talking and whoever He is warning ONLY, the third party which logically should be another human was never mentioned in 17:36, this will make it really vague

Let's move on to the second location where the meaning '???????????cause something to follow something'???? appeared:

YUSUFALI: And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah.

PICKTHAL: And We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps, confirming that which was (revealed) before him in the Torah, and We bestowed on him the Gospel wherein is guidance and a light, confirming that which was (revealed) before it in the Torah - a guidance and an admonition unto those who ward off (evil).

SHAKIR: And We sent after them in their footsteps Isa, son of Marium, verifying what was before him of the Taurat and We gave him the Injeel in which was guidance and light, and verifying what was before it of Taurat and a guidance and an admonition for those who guard (against evil).
[The Quran ; 5:46]

وَقَفَّيْنَا عَلَى آثَارِهِم بِعَيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ مُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَآتَيْنَاهُ الإِنجِيلَ فِيهِ هُدًى وَنُورٌ وَمُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَهُدًى وَمَوْعِظَةً لِّلْمُتَّقِينَ (46)

-> Wow, Mister Yusuf Ali just contradicted himself, let me tell you that this is normal with Mister Yusuf Ali, for the same Arabic word '???? وَقَفَّيْنَا'???? in 2:87 which he translated it as '???????????And Followed'????, in 5:46 he translated it here as '???????????We Sent'????, why is that brothers and sisters? Isn't the same identical word and context?

YUSUFALI: '??????????? And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary'????

PICKTHAL: '???? And We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps'????

SHAKIR: '???? And We sent after them in their footsteps Isa, son of Marium'????

We can see also that the other two translators remained consistent with their translations '???????????We Caused Jesus to follow in their footsteps'???? and '???????????We sent Isa after them in their footstep'????, see '???????????Caused something to follow something'????, both somethings must be mentioned, and you should also be aware that We Sent = We Cause someone to Follow '???????????logically speaking'????, '???????????We Followed'???? on the other hand does not make sense

No need for testing 17:36 any more, let's move to the last location where the meaning '???????????cause something to follow something'???? appeared:

YUSUFALI: Then, in their wake, We followed them up with (others of) Our messengers: We sent after them Jesus the son of Mary, and bestowed on him the Gospel; and We ordained in the hearts of those who followed him Compassion and Mercy. But the Monasticism which they invented for themselves, We did not prescribe for them: (We commanded) only the seeking for the Good Pleasure of Allah; but that they did not foster as they should have done. Yet We bestowed, on those among them who believed, their (due) reward, but many of them are rebellious transgressors.

PICKTHAL: Then We caused Our messengers to follow in their footsteps; and We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow, and gave him the Gospel, and placed compassion and mercy in the hearts of those who followed him. But monasticism they invented - We ordained it not for them - only seeking Allah's pleasure, and they observed it not with right observance. So We give those of them who believe their reward, but many of them are evil-livers.

SHAKIR: Then We made Our messengers to follow in their footsteps, and We sent Isa son of Marium afterwards, and We gave him the Injeel, and We put in the hearts of those who followed him kindness and mercy; and (as for) monkery, they innovated it-- We did not prescribe it to them-- only to seek Allah's pleasure, but they did not observe it with its due observance; so We gave to those of them who believed their reward, and most of them are transgressors.
[The Quran ; 57:26]

ثُمَّ قَفَّيْنَا عَلَى آثَارِهِم بِرُسُلِنَا وَقَفَّيْنَا بِعِيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ وَآتَيْنَاهُ الْإِنجِيلَ وَجَعَلْنَا فِي قُلُوبِ الَّذِينَ اتَّبَعُوهُ رَأْفَةً وَرَحْمَةً وَرَهْبَانِيَّةً ابْتَدَعُوهَا مَا كَتَبْنَاهَا عَلَيْهِمْ إِلَّا ابْتِغَاء رِضْوَانِ اللَّهِ فَمَا رَعَوْهَا حَقَّ رِعَايَتِهَا فَآتَيْنَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مِنْهُمْ أَجْرَهُمْ وَكَثِيرٌ مِّنْهُمْ فَاسِقُونَ (27)

-> It seems Yusuf Ali recognised that he contradicted himself when he translated 2:87 & 5:46 so he tried to fix it in 57:26, but unfortunately he went with the wrong coin side again. Well if you don't believe me, wait for the last bit of my comment.
We see in 57:27 the same Arabic word '???? قَفَّيْنَا'????, let's see how the 3 translators did:
YUSUFALI: '??????????? Then, in their wake, We followed them up with (others of) Our messengers'????

PICKTHAL: '???? Then We caused Our messengers to follow in their footsteps'????

SHAKIR: '???? Then We made[u] Our messengers [u]to follow in their footsteps'????

Y A did the same mistake again, he translated it as '???????????We followed'???? while Allah never follow any one, as you all know, he totally dropped '???????????We caused'???? . We can also see that PICKTHAL remained consistent '????We Caused to Follow'???? , SHAKIR on the other hand changed it from '???????????We Sent'???? to '???????????We Made to Follow'???? which I see both the same meaning '???????????Logically speaking'????

WE HAVE TO CONCLUDE: '???? قَفَّيْنَا'???? MEANS '???????????MADE TO FOLLOW'???? or '???????????CAUSE TO FOLLOW. It is al100% wrong if translated as '???????????TO FOLLOW'????

Summary
1) All three verses where '???? قَفَّيْنَا'???? '???????????Qaffayna'???? appeared was about one context only that Allah CAUSED PROPHETS TO FOLLOW ONE ANOTHER

2) There is only one meaning to that word if it has a shadda on the Fa, which is '???????????to cause to follow'???? or '???????????Made to follow'???? and it can equivalent to '???????????We sent'???? logically speaking

3) Yet testing that second meaning of the word '???????????Qa Fa Ya'???? under 17:36 will fail because how we can not understand the following:

Do Not Cause to follow what you lack knowledge in ?, see the two somethings were not mentioned only one, it looks like this, '???????????Don't cause to follow something'???? now I have to ask, '???????????Don't cause WHOM[/n] to follow what we lack knowledge in?'????, some may say the verse means '???????????Don't cause [u]ANYONE to follow what you lack knowledge in'????, but the verse never said '???????????ANYONE'????, that is why the second meaning of the word '???????????Qa Fa Ya'???? fails if we apply it to 17:36

If we drop the cause the word will become '???????????To Follow'???? but there is another common quranic word for that, the Quran was consistent in using the Arabic word '???? تَبِعَ'????, '???????????Ta Ba Aa'???? and all its diversions to express '???????????something following something'????, over 170 times the word was used including numerous warnings and advices, here is a couple of examples that include two advices '???????????to follow something'???? and one warning '???????????not to follow something'????:

'???????????We said: Go forth from this (state) all; so surely there will come to you a guidance from Me, then whoever follows My guidance, no fear shall come upon them, nor shall they grieve.'????

[The Quran ; 2:38]

قُلْنَا اهْبِطُواْ مِنْهَا جَمِيعاً فَإِمَّا يَأْتِيَنَّكُم مِّنِّي هُدًى فَمَن تَبِعَ هُدَايَ فَلاَ خَوْفٌ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلاَ هُمْ يَحْزَنُونَ (38)



'???????????Follow what has been revealed to you from your Lord and do not follow guardians besides Him, how little do you mind.'????

[The Quran ; 7:3]

اتَّبِعُواْ مَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكُم مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ وَلاَ تَتَّبِعُواْ مِن دُونِهِ أَوْلِيَاء قَلِيلاً مَّا تَذَكَّرُونَ (3)



Why on earth Allah has used that word numerous times to express '???????????to follow'???? while in those three verses where '???????????Qaffayna'???? appeared He used another word?, well the answer is simple because the other word DOES NOT MEAN '???????????TO FOLLOW'????, but '??????????? TO CAUSE TO FOLLOW'????, this is obvious from the very lil times it was used '???????????3 times'???? in comparison with '???????????over 170 times'???? for the other word that MEANS '???????????TO FOLLOW'????, IT is also easy to my 15 years old daughter to recognise that the 3 times this word appeared it was talking about the same context that Allah caused prophets to follow one another. Not a hard puzzle, isn't it?

Now let's look at another example of Yusuf Ali low IQ and surly his lack of Arabic:

The Quran mentioned the Planets and the Stars numerous times, the Arabic word for a Planet is '???? كَوْكَبٌ'???? pronounced '???????????Kawkab'????, the Arabic word for a Star is '???? نجم'???? pronounced '???????????Nijm'????:

Yusuf Ali: '???????????Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth. The Parable of His Light is as if there were a Niche and within it a Lamp: the Lamp enclosed in Glass: the glass as it were a brilliant star: Lit from a blessed Tree, an Olive, neither of the east nor of the west, whose oil is well-nigh luminous, though fire scarce touched it: Light upon Light! Allah doth guide whom He will to His Light: Allah doth set forth Parables for men: and Allah doth know all things.'????
[The Quran ; 24:35]

اللَّهُ نُورُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ مَثَلُ نُورِهِ كَمِشْكَاةٍ فِيهَا مِصْبَاحٌ الْمِصْبَاحُ فِي زُجَاجَةٍ الزُّجَاجَةُ كَأَنَّهَا كَوْكَبٌ دُرِّيٌّ يُوقَدُ مِن شَجَرَةٍ مُّبَارَكَةٍ زَيْتُونِةٍ لَّا شَرْقِيَّةٍ وَلَا غَرْبِيَّةٍ يَكَادُ زَيْتُهَا يُضِيءُ وَلَوْ لَمْ تَمْسَسْهُ نَارٌ نُّورٌ عَلَى نُورٍ يَهْدِي اللَّهُ لِنُورِهِ مَن يَشَاء وَيَضْرِبُ اللَّهُ الْأَمْثَالَ لِلنَّاسِ وَاللَّهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمٌ (35)


In all locations where this common Arabic word which means a Planet appeared, Yusuf Ali insisted that it is a Star, which makes me think:

1) Yusuf Ali did not understand the difference between a star and a planet
2) Yusuf Ali did not understand the simple Arabic words, hmmmmm how about the tough Arabic words then?

Hence his translation has no value to me neither any other translations because simply I do not need it as a native Arabic speaker, however it really hurts me how many non Arabic speakers are mislead by those claiming to be native Arabic speakers like R K and many more on F M, may Allah find a way out for them


Peace be with you all

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam All

If you visit any Quran alone web site you will notice something very strange, most Quran aloners understand 17:36 wrong, it seems they took it as an idol for every argument they present, let me bring the verse in here and see for yourselves what it means and how the Quran aloners wrongly understand it:

وَلاَ تَقْفُ مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ إِنَّ السَّمْعَ وَالْبَصَرَ وَالْفُؤَادَ كُلُّ أُولئِكَ كَانَ عَنْهُ مَسْؤُولاً (36)

[The Quran ; 17:36]

The verse is translated as follow :

YUSUFALI: And pursue not that of which thou hast no knowledge; for every act of hearing, or of seeing or of (feeling in) the heart will be enquired into (on the Day of Reckoning).

PICKTHAL: (O man), follow not that whereof thou hast no knowledge. Lo! the hearing and the sight and the heart - of each of these it will be asked.

SHAKIR: And follow not that of which you have not the knowledge; surely the hearing and the sight and the heart, all of these, shall be questioned about that.
[The Quran ; 17:36]
-> The key word that is causing all this confusion is the Arabic word : '???? تَقْفُ'????, pronounce as '???????????Taqifu'????, or '???????????Taqiffu'???? with a shaddah '???????????stress'???? on the letter Fa, this means the word has two meanings:

1) '???????????Taqifu'????, without a shaddah on the Fa = '???????????to stand up'????
2) '???????????Taqiffu'???? with a shaddah '???????????stress'???? on the letter Fa = '???????????Cause to follow'????

A typical Quran aloner understanding to 17:36 is like this:

You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain, and you are responsible for using them.
[17:36 translation by Rashad Khalifa, http://www.submission.org/suras/sura17.htm

After studying the above translation which many Quran aloners use as an argument, there will be no doubt that its supporters are really confused

What I have noted that, the supporters for this understanding never provided any evidence other than this:

1) The same word '???????????Qaffa'???? was used in another 3 locations which means to follow
2) A few English translations showed the Arabic word '???????????T Q F'???? as '???????????to follow'???? as seen above by the 3 most popular translators

Looking closely at their evidences we will see clearly that both have no merit and both can't be admissible to support their argument,

If we consider the first meaning '???????????Taqifu'????, without a shaddah on the Fa = '???????????to stand up'???? then 17:36 will be translated literally as follow:

You shall not STAND UP to any thing you lack knowledge of,. The hearing, the seeing and the hearts are all responsibilities.

The above means metaphorically as commonly known within the Arabs

You shall not ARGUE to any thing you lack knowledge of,. the hearing, the seeing and the hearts are all responsibilities.

This translation makes great sense indeed, because it is a positive message that encourages people to gain knowledge about anything they want to argue about it, IF YOU ARGUE WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE THEN A SIN IS COMMITTED ACCORDING TO 17:36, but if you have the knowledge then it is ok to argue about it and no sin will be committed, if you lack the knowledge about something and you want to argue about it then, 17:36 tells you to go and gain knowledge about it then come back and argue.

The second half of the verse will fit like a glove for this first half understanding because whatever you will say that you heard or saw will be held against you by Allah on the account day

If we look at Rashad Khalifa translation we can see easily how flawed it is :

Rashad Khalifa translated:
'????You shall not accept any information,'????,

Ahmed says:
The Arabic verse never suggested any acceptance of any information, even metaphorically

Rashad Khalifa translated:
'????, unless you verify it for yourself'????,

Ahmed says:
The Arabic verse never suggested any verification of any information by any one including the self, even metaphorically. In essence the above two combined sentences by Rashad Khaifa :
You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself should equal '???? وَلاَ تَقْفُ مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ'????, wow, I'm still shaking my head to where the hell R K got this translation from, I actually started to doubt that he was a native Arabic speaker.

For the rest of the verse:

Rashad Khalifa translated:
'????I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain'????

Ahmed says:
The verse never mentioned that Allah has given us hearing, eyesight and the brain, in fact the verse never ever mentioned brains, I guess someone needs one in here, all this bit from 17:36 '???? إِنَّ السَّمْعَ وَالْبَصَرَ وَالْفُؤَادَ'???? means: '????The hearing, the seeing and the heart'????, nothing more and nothing less, of course on its own it makes no sense, that is what the rest of the verse is for, it is sort of information regarding those three things that we have:

Rashad Khalifa translated:
'???? , and you are responsible for using them.'????

Ahmed says:
hmmmm, not sure also where he got this silly translation from, the rest of the verse simply telling us a piece of important information about '???????????The hearing, the seeing and the heart'????, that they are responsibilities, for example, don't say you have heard while you did not hear and don't say you have seen while you didn't see, in essence , '???????????DO NOT ARGUE IF YOU LACK KNOWLEDGE'????

Obviously the translation presented by R K was only to serve one purpose, to facilitate the made up code 19 as a verification method to everything in the Quran including dropping two verses from it, he cared less to present an accurate translation to guide those who lack Arabic and can't understand the Quran, obviously many fell in his trap, may Allah save them and guide them back to the right path

If we consider the second meaning '???????????Taqiffu'???? with a shaddah '???????????stress'???? on the letter Fa = '???????????to cause to follow'????, we see that the three translators mentioned earlier based it on that meaning but yet something is missing or at least vague in the context as I will explain later, the word 'Taqiffu' means '???????????to cause something to follow something'????, it never means '???????????something to follow something'????, the cause by an entity is a must here.

Let's have a look at all the three locations where '???????????Qa FFa Ya'???? with a shaddah on the Fa, appeared and see what it means within the context:

YUSUFALI: We gave Moses the Book and followed him up with a succession of messengers; We gave Jesus the son of Mary Clear (Signs) and strengthened him with the holy spirit. Is it that whenever there comes to you a messenger with what ye yourselves desire not, ye are puffed up with pride?- Some ye called impostors, and others ye slay!

PICKTHAL: And verily We gave unto Moses the Scripture and We caused a train of messengers to follow after him, and We gave unto Jesus, son of Mary, clear proofs (of Allah's sovereignty), and We supported him with the Holy spirit. Is it ever so, that, when there cometh unto you a messenger (from Allah) with that which ye yourselves desire not, ye grow arrogant, and some ye disbelieve and some ye slay?

SHAKIR: And most certainly We gave Musa the Book and We sent messengers after him one after another; and We gave Isa, the son of Marium, clear arguments and strengthened him with the holy spirit, What! whenever then a messenger came to you with that which your souls did not desire, you were insolent so you called some liars and some you slew.
[The Quran ; 2:87]

وَلَقَدْ آتَيْنَا مُوسَى الْكِتَابَ وَقَفَّيْنَا مِن بَعْدِهِ بِالرُّسُلِ وَآتَيْنَا عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَأَيَّدْنَاهُ بِرُوحِ الْقُدُسِ أَفَكُلَّمَا جَاءكُمْ رَسُولٌ بِمَا لاَ تَهْوَى أَنفُسُكُمُ اسْتَكْبَرْتُمْ فَفَرِيقاً كَذَّبْتُمْ وَفَرِيقاً تَقْتُلُونَ (87)

-> What can I say, well not much indeed, let's just look at the Arabic word '???? وَقَفَّيْنَا'????and see for ourselves:

YUSUFALI: '???????????We gave Moses the Book and followed him up with a succession of messengers'????

PICKTHAL: '????and We caused a train of messengers to follow after him'????

SHAKIR: '????and We sent messengers after him one after another'????

-> It seems to me that Yusuf Ali suffers from a very low IQ, we can see that the other two translated the Arabic word as an action that is caused by Allah, '???????????We Caused to Follow'???? and '???????????We Sent'????, but mister Yusuf Ali said it like this '???????????and followed him'????, come on, give me a break will ya?, what sense is that? It sounds like Allah is following someone !!

See if I'm following a friend on a path, then I should say I followed that person, but if I told my son to follow that person then I have to say it that I caused my son to follow that person because THE ACTION IS REFERING TO ME NOT TO MY SON and the action here was to cause other prophets to come one after another, this was understood perfectly by the other 2 translators PICKTHAL & SHAKIR , the meaning was clear to them within the context, '???????????Allah caused other messengers to follow Moses'????, see '???????????Caused something to follow something'????

Let's test 17:36 under the understanding that Taqiffu means '???????????to cause something to follow something'????

وَلاَ تَقْفُ مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ إِنَّ السَّمْعَ وَالْبَصَرَ وَالْفُؤَادَ كُلُّ أُولئِكَ كَانَ عَنْهُ مَسْؤُولاً (36)


The translation should be like this:

Do Not cause to follow what you lack knowledge in,

Oh please give me another break will ya, What sense is that?

If it says '???????????Do Not Cause '????something" to follow what you lack knowledge in'????, I can accept it despite its lack of sense, but there is no third party mentioned in the verse, it is God talking and whoever He is warning ONLY, the third party which logically should be another human was never mentioned in 17:36, this will make it really vague

Let's move on to the second location where the meaning '???????????cause something to follow something'???? appeared:

YUSUFALI: And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah.

PICKTHAL: And We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps, confirming that which was (revealed) before him in the Torah, and We bestowed on him the Gospel wherein is guidance and a light, confirming that which was (revealed) before it in the Torah - a guidance and an admonition unto those who ward off (evil).

SHAKIR: And We sent after them in their footsteps Isa, son of Marium, verifying what was before him of the Taurat and We gave him the Injeel in which was guidance and light, and verifying what was before it of Taurat and a guidance and an admonition for those who guard (against evil).
[The Quran ; 5:46]

وَقَفَّيْنَا عَلَى آثَارِهِم بِعَيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ مُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَآتَيْنَاهُ الإِنجِيلَ فِيهِ هُدًى وَنُورٌ وَمُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَهُدًى وَمَوْعِظَةً لِّلْمُتَّقِينَ (46)

-> Wow, Mister Yusuf Ali just contradicted himself, let me tell you that this is normal with Mister Yusuf Ali, for the same Arabic word '???? وَقَفَّيْنَا'???? in 2:87 which he translated it as '???????????And Followed'????, in 5:46 he translated it here as '???????????We Sent'????, why is that brothers and sisters? Isn't the same identical word and context?

YUSUFALI: '??????????? And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary'????

PICKTHAL: '???? And We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps'????

SHAKIR: '???? And We sent after them in their footsteps Isa, son of Marium'????

We can see also that the other two translators remained consistent with their translations '???????????We Caused Jesus to follow in their footsteps'???? and '???????????We sent Isa after them in their footstep'????, see '???????????Caused something to follow something'????, both somethings must be mentioned, and you should also be aware that We Sent = We Cause someone to Follow '???????????logically speaking'????, '???????????We Followed'???? on the other hand does not make sense

No need for testing 17:36 any more, let's move to the last location where the meaning '???????????cause something to follow something'???? appeared:

YUSUFALI: Then, in their wake, We followed them up with (others of) Our messengers: We sent after them Jesus the son of Mary, and bestowed on him the Gospel; and We ordained in the hearts of those who followed him Compassion and Mercy. But the Monasticism which they invented for themselves, We did not prescribe for them: (We commanded) only the seeking for the Good Pleasure of Allah; but that they did not foster as they should have done. Yet We bestowed, on those among them who believed, their (due) reward, but many of them are rebellious transgressors.

PICKTHAL: Then We caused Our messengers to follow in their footsteps; and We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow, and gave him the Gospel, and placed compassion and mercy in the hearts of those who followed him. But monasticism they invented - We ordained it not for them - only seeking Allah's pleasure, and they observed it not with right observance. So We give those of them who believe their reward, but many of them are evil-livers.

SHAKIR: Then We made Our messengers to follow in their footsteps, and We sent Isa son of Marium afterwards, and We gave him the Injeel, and We put in the hearts of those who followed him kindness and mercy; and (as for) monkery, they innovated it-- We did not prescribe it to them-- only to seek Allah's pleasure, but they did not observe it with its due observance; so We gave to those of them who believed their reward, and most of them are transgressors.
[The Quran ; 57:26]

ثُمَّ قَفَّيْنَا عَلَى آثَارِهِم بِرُسُلِنَا وَقَفَّيْنَا بِعِيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ وَآتَيْنَاهُ الْإِنجِيلَ وَجَعَلْنَا فِي قُلُوبِ الَّذِينَ اتَّبَعُوهُ رَأْفَةً وَرَحْمَةً وَرَهْبَانِيَّةً ابْتَدَعُوهَا مَا كَتَبْنَاهَا عَلَيْهِمْ إِلَّا ابْتِغَاء رِضْوَانِ اللَّهِ فَمَا رَعَوْهَا حَقَّ رِعَايَتِهَا فَآتَيْنَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مِنْهُمْ أَجْرَهُمْ وَكَثِيرٌ مِّنْهُمْ فَاسِقُونَ (27)

-> It seems Yusuf Ali recognised that he contradicted himself when he translated 2:87 & 5:46 so he tried to fix it in 57:26, but unfortunately he went with the wrong coin side again. Well if you don't believe me, wait for the last bit of my comment.
We see in 57:27 the same Arabic word '???? قَفَّيْنَا'????, let's see how the 3 translators did:
YUSUFALI: '??????????? Then, in their wake, We followed them up with (others of) Our messengers'????

PICKTHAL: '???? Then We caused Our messengers to follow in their footsteps'????

SHAKIR: '???? Then We made[u] Our messengers [u]to follow in their footsteps'????

Y A did the same mistake again, he translated it as '???????????We followed'???? while Allah never follow any one, as you all know, he totally dropped '???????????We caused'???? . We can also see that PICKTHAL remained consistent '????We Caused to Follow'???? , SHAKIR on the other hand changed it from '???????????We Sent'???? to '???????????We Made to Follow'???? which I see both the same meaning '???????????Logically speaking'????

WE HAVE TO CONCLUDE: '???? قَفَّيْنَا'???? MEANS '???????????MADE TO FOLLOW'???? or '???????????CAUSE TO FOLLOW. It is al100% wrong if translated as '???????????TO FOLLOW'????

Summary
1) All three verses where '???? قَفَّيْنَا'???? '???????????Qaffayna'???? appeared was about one context only that Allah CAUSED PROPHETS TO FOLLOW ONE ANOTHER

2) There is only one meaning to that word if it has a shadda on the Fa, which is '???????????to cause to follow'???? or '???????????Made to follow'???? and it can equivalent to '???????????We sent'???? logically speaking

3) Yet testing that second meaning of the word '???????????Qa Fa Ya'???? under 17:36 will fail because how we can not understand the following:

Do Not Cause to follow what you lack knowledge in ?, see the two somethings were not mentioned only one, it looks like this, '???????????Don't cause to follow something'???? now I have to ask, '???????????Don't cause WHOM[/n] to follow what we lack knowledge in?'????, some may say the verse means '???????????Don't cause [u]ANYONE to follow what you lack knowledge in'????, but the verse never said '???????????ANYONE'????, that is why the second meaning of the word '???????????Qa Fa Ya'???? fails if we apply it to 17:36

If we drop the cause the word will become '???????????To Follow'???? but there is another common quranic word for that, the Quran was consistent in using the Arabic word '???? تَبِعَ'????, '???????????Ta Ba Aa'???? and all its diversions to express '???????????something following something'????, over 170 times the word was used including numerous warnings and advices, here is a couple of examples that include two advices '???????????to follow something'???? and one warning '???????????not to follow something'????:

'???????????We said: Go forth from this (state) all; so surely there will come to you a guidance from Me, then whoever follows My guidance, no fear shall come upon them, nor shall they grieve.'????

[The Quran ; 2:38]

قُلْنَا اهْبِطُواْ مِنْهَا جَمِيعاً فَإِمَّا يَأْتِيَنَّكُم مِّنِّي هُدًى فَمَن تَبِعَ هُدَايَ فَلاَ خَوْفٌ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلاَ هُمْ يَحْزَنُونَ (38)



'???????????Follow what has been revealed to you from your Lord and do not follow guardians besides Him, how little do you mind.'????

[The Quran ; 7:3]

اتَّبِعُواْ مَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكُم مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ وَلاَ تَتَّبِعُواْ مِن دُونِهِ أَوْلِيَاء قَلِيلاً مَّا تَذَكَّرُونَ (3)



Why on earth Allah has used that word numerous times to express '???????????to follow'???? while in those three verses where '???????????Qaffayna'???? appeared He used another word?, well the answer is simple because the other word DOES NOT MEAN '???????????TO FOLLOW'????, but '??????????? TO CAUSE TO FOLLOW'????, this is obvious from the very lil times it was used '???????????3 times'???? in comparison with '???????????over 170 times'???? for the other word that MEANS '???????????TO FOLLOW'????, IT is also easy to my 15 years old daughter to recognise that the 3 times this word appeared it was talking about the same context that Allah caused prophets to follow one another. Not a hard puzzle, isn't it?

Now let's look at another example of Yusuf Ali low IQ and surly his lack of Arabic:

The Quran mentioned the Planets and the Stars numerous times, the Arabic word for a Planet is '???? كَوْكَبٌ'???? pronounced '???????????Kawkab'????, the Arabic word for a Star is '???? نجم'???? pronounced '???????????Nijm'????:

Yusuf Ali: '???????????Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth. The Parable of His Light is as if there were a Niche and within it a Lamp: the Lamp enclosed in Glass: the glass as it were a brilliant star: Lit from a blessed Tree, an Olive, neither of the east nor of the west, whose oil is well-nigh luminous, though fire scarce touched it: Light upon Light! Allah doth guide whom He will to His Light: Allah doth set forth Parables for men: and Allah doth know all things.'????
[The Quran ; 24:35]

اللَّهُ نُورُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ مَثَلُ نُورِهِ كَمِشْكَاةٍ فِيهَا مِصْبَاحٌ الْمِصْبَاحُ فِي زُجَاجَةٍ الزُّجَاجَةُ كَأَنَّهَا كَوْكَبٌ دُرِّيٌّ يُوقَدُ مِن شَجَرَةٍ مُّبَارَكَةٍ زَيْتُونِةٍ لَّا شَرْقِيَّةٍ وَلَا غَرْبِيَّةٍ يَكَادُ زَيْتُهَا يُضِيءُ وَلَوْ لَمْ تَمْسَسْهُ نَارٌ نُّورٌ عَلَى نُورٍ يَهْدِي اللَّهُ لِنُورِهِ مَن يَشَاء وَيَضْرِبُ اللَّهُ الْأَمْثَالَ لِلنَّاسِ وَاللَّهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمٌ (35)


In all locations where this common Arabic word which means a Planet appeared, Yusuf Ali insisted that it is a Star, which makes me think:

1) Yusuf Ali did not understand the difference between a star and a planet
2) Yusuf Ali did not understand the simple Arabic words, hmmmmm how about the tough Arabic words then?

Hence his translation has no value to me neither any other translations because simply I do not need it as a native Arabic speaker, however it really hurts me how many non Arabic speakers are mislead by those claiming to be native Arabic speakers like R K and many more on F M, may Allah find a way out for them


Peace be with you all

[Anonymous]

Sorry brother Ahmed,

qafaa (qaf, fa, alif maqsooraa) is a valid root 17:36 says laa taqfoo not laa taqiffoo, this is probably your dialect getting in the way. qaffaa (fa mashdoodah) means to cause to follow and qafaa mans to follow. The ya there represents the waw that has been cut short because of it being a command. However, we often see the waw and the dommah used interchangeable in old Arabic, as well as the kasra and the ya and even sometimes the fathah and the alif. SO laa taqfoo DOES mean don't follow. you can find it in some hadeeths where it says as it concerns al-intimaa'(or family association) naqfoo abaanaa wa nanfee ummana' showing that qafaa is to follow. Fu'aad does mean heart but also means mind. It seems that the old Arabs associated the mind with feelings, and therefore the heart. That is why sadr (chest) can mean 'head' as well. Qalb also can have the meaning of mind, and as the center of judgement. I have heard of some people who feel their center of consciousness(their minds) in their chest and not their heads.

Godbless,
Anwar

[Anonymous]

Sorry brother Ahmed,

qafaa (qaf, fa, alif maqsooraa) is a valid root 17:36 says laa taqfoo not laa taqiffoo, this is probably your dialect getting in the way. qaffaa (fa mashdoodah) means to cause to follow and qafaa mans to follow. The ya there represents the waw that has been cut short because of it being a command. However, we often see the waw and the dommah used interchangeable in old Arabic, as well as the kasra and the ya and even sometimes the fathah and the alif. SO laa taqfoo DOES mean don't follow. you can find it in some hadeeths where it says as it concerns al-intimaa'(or family association) naqfoo abaanaa wa nanfee ummana' showing that qafaa is to follow. Fu'aad does mean heart but also means mind. It seems that the old Arabs associated the mind with feelings, and therefore the heart. That is why sadr (chest) can mean 'head' as well. Qalb also can have the meaning of mind, and as the center of judgement. I have heard of some people who feel their center of consciousness(their minds) in their chest and not their heads.

Godbless,
Anwar

[AhmedBahgat]

[AhmedBahgat]

[The]

# perhaps a bit off-topic, but either way the verse is one of the most abused verses! seems some peepz have made it their pretext to:

* reject selectively and without sufficient proof what the shiites and sunnis say

** incorporate selectively and without reason(s) what the non-muslims and wannabes say

## u then have wannabes quoting "unprovable" statements ( mostly from non-muslims), and in complete disregard of their own understanding of the verse accepting the same at face-value...hypocrisy is their mark! (-:

so whatever the sunnis and the shiites say, even though corroborated by the quran, is deemed as unacceptable, while that which comes from christians and jews and others (including those hostile to islam) becomes the basis of their religion! :-S

# these "quran-aloners" are lexicon-aloners, jew+christian+others-aloners, hearsay-aloners and the like: they will testify to any lie and unverified info as long as it suits their own faith...much like afghani of yore and crone in recent times...a curious marriage of disbelief and pretence!