Dear Abdallah, Just curious, when you say you are not going to wait, what are you planning to do? Would you mind let us know? Initially, I was waiting for the quran project to be completed too. Until late last year, I was in discussion with the project maintainer, Mr Yousif. We discuss the problems he was facing, and seems that the project is not progressing much. That was the time when I decided I would like to do something about it, and it was not programming an application! First, I get involve in some font developement, and at the same time I created the Quran file. After a few months of trying and searching, I finally know what to do exactly to develop a complete font to display the quran. Later, I run into the problems of encoding the quran. I decided to develop my own approach, with the priority of visual correctness, and also correct representation of the words. Thus, the results, as I posted last time. Now, I have completed to quran text with the exact visual representation of the Madinah Mushaf. That is what needed to be proofread. I think it is complete, with minor correction needed. As for searching, and correct word representation, I think current state of standards and technologies still need to be develop. That is what is going on in this forum. What I would like to achieve is to index the word of the quran , with their root words. This has been done, but only part of it available in digital format. Hope we can finish this soon.
Regards. On 6/30/05, Abdalla Alothman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thursday 30 June 2005 01:12, Mete Kural wrote: > > > > Salaamu Alaikum Abdalla, > > Wa alaikum asalam wa rahmatullaah. > > > I don't quite understand what you mean here in trying to distinguish the > > Quran > > from being a scripture but only a recital. > > I didn't make the distinction, it's already there before I was born. Hence, > a written Quran is called a MuS-Haf where as a Tilaawa is not called a > MuS-Haf. > Moreover, I didn't deny that the Quran takes various forms, of which one is > the > written form (MuS-Haf). As for exclusively saying that it is a recital, what > can > I do? It's called Quraan. Insinuating that I deny that the Quran is a kitaab > is a > bit unappropriate. I simply denied that the Quran is a kutbaan (something > that is > only written before it is distributed.) From a developer's perspective, think > of it > as raw text that you can format as HTML, XML, PDF, or pass it to a speech > engine to > be read outloud. > > > A scripture is recited. > > Yes, but it remains a scripture. If you burn all of its copies in the whole > world, nobody can reproduce it, because it is depended on the written sources. > This cannot happen to the Quran because it is not a scripture, but a recital. > Moreover, a scripture is not recited the way the Quran should be recited (wa > rattil al-qur-aana tarteela. Surat Al-Muzzamil) > > Because the Pentatuech (Torah) is a scripture, it is non-existent today (the > people of Musa (s) lost it many times before the last time; and whenever they > lost it they had bad luck in battles. See Albaqrah:248). What exists is what > it supposedly contained. The Quran, however, is exists. > > In its original format, the scripture has its sources in manuscripts. The > sources > of the Quran are not manuscripts or divine materials. > > > As you know, the second ayah of the second surah start > > with "dhaalika l-kitaabu laa rayba fiih" translated in many translations > > similar > > to "This is the Scripture whereof there is no doubt". > > Also the third ayah of the third surah mentions "nazzala `alayka l-kitaaba > > bi-l-haqq" > > translated in Pickthall as "He hath revealed unto thee the Scripture with > > truth". In addition, please find: > > > > Also the third ayah of the third surah mentions "nazzala `alayka l-kitaaba > > bi-l-haqq" > > translated in Pickthall as "He hath revealed unto thee the Scripture with > > truth". > [...] > > Shakir translates it as: This Book, there is no doubt in it, is a > guide to those who guard (against evil). > > Yusuf Ali translates it as: This is the Book; in it is guidance sure, > without doubt, to those who fear Allah; > > See: http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html > > Khan and Hilali translate it as: This is the Book (the Qur'ân), > whereof there is no doubt, a guidance to those who are Al-Muttaqûn > [the pious and righteous persons who fear Allâh much (abstain from all > kinds of sins and evil deeds which He has forbidden) and love Allâh > much (perform all kinds of good deeds which He has ordained)]. > > See: http://quran.nu/en/ > > Among the favored translations by Ahl Al-Sunna, I only see Pickthall > using "scripture." And that might be related to his pre-Islam > background or maybe it's his personal opinion. Nevertheless, I am by > no means trying to discredit Pickthall and his fine works. Also, whoever > wants to refer to the Quran as a "scripture" let them do so, it's not > really my concern. > > When it comes to the Quran being a book, nobody is denying that it is > a "kitaab," but the question is that the "kitab" is not prepared by > any human being. It is a kitab alright, but the question is who wrote > it? And where is it? And what does it look like? That's why I clarified > that the book is free format--it has the capability to spread in thin > air as radio waves, paper and ink, stones, or whatever. > > When it comes to the Pentatauech, those books where sent down on Moses > in a physical format. So they take the word "scripture;" that's not > the end of their scriptures, though. The word is a wrong word to > describe the Quran for reasons that are unsuitable as a discussion in > this mailing list. > > The summary of the opinion I presented is very simple. The Quran is > not bound by any physical format (i.e., paper and ink, etc.) When we > hear the Quran in radio, what we are listening to is called "The Noble > Quran" and so on. > > The idea is that when an application developer wishes to develop any > application related to the Quran, she or he should ask: "What am I > trying to present?" If the content is to present a "soft" MuS-Haf -- > something that looks like a MuS-Haf on a computer screen -- then I > guess the application developer should comply with what the Muslims > have agreed upon on what constitutes a MuS-Haf, visually speaking. But > if the goal is to do some operations with the Quran, the text doesn't > have to look exactly like the MuS-Haf. > > > Even the most traditional accounts record that the transmission was > > both oral and written. > > Of course, and nobody is denying that as well. And nobody can deny > that if it wasn't for tawaatur, we would not have at hand a single > authentic qiraa-ah. ;) > > It is not wrong to write the Quran, but IMHO, I think it is wrong to > claim that the Quran is a scripture only. When preachers of other > religions appear on TV an say, "This is the word of God!" They fall > into numerous problems that we Muslims do not need (e.g., in their > ancient scriptures, the word "god"--as is--is not there.) such as > letting others imagine that the written Quran should only appear as it > is in the MaSaaHif. As time passes by, people will tend to ignore the > rulings related to the text of the Quran if the text does not look > like a MuS-Haf (e.g., maintaining a cleanliness state and wearing > appropriate clothing as a means of respect). > > > Remember that surah 85 ayah 21-22 says: > > > > "bal huwa qur'anu mujeed. fee lawhum mahfoodh." > > This has nothing to do, IMHO, with constraining the Quran into its > written format only, and can be answered back with an aya from surat > Al-Qiyama: > > Fa itha qar-anahu fattabi' qur-aanah. (Thuma in 'alayna bayanah) > > It doesn't say fa itha katabnahu for obvious reasons... > > Allah (tt) did not send down a book that has a physical format just > like what the Messenger Musa (a) received from Allah as Allah (tt) > says in many places including surat Al-A'laa: > > Ina hatha lafi al-suHuf al-Uoola, suHufi Ibraheema wa Musa. > > There are no suHuf or alwaaH (tablets) that were sent down by Allah > (tt), IMHO. Moreover, looking at various Quran manuscripts throughout > the Islamic history reveals undeniable facts that: > > 1. In the early stages of its writing, the Quran was written with > plain letters. > > 2. Dotting notations was added in more than one stage. > > 3. Simple diacritical marks where added in slow steps. > > 4. There wasn't any aya numbers or sections > > Yet, what they held in their hands was indeed called The Quran. I > doubt that anyone can deny that the Sura (Surat Taaha) 'Umar snatched > from his sister's hands before his Islam--that sura that caused an > earthquake in his heart-- looked like Surat Taaha we see today in the > MuS-Haf. The same thing applies when we were in highschool and we were > asked to write down a passage from the Quran. I doubt anyone can deny > that what we wrote was a Quran (We even wrote it down without > diacritical marks!) If nobody doubts, then I ask: Why then are > numerous Quran related projects are postponed until what can be > presented will match the MuS-Haf? I don't know about the others, but > I'm not going to wait. :) > > Copying the Quran and inventing numerous ways to present it and > simplify its readings was an amazing process that the SaHaaba and the > tabi'een overtook and amazed the world with it [at times when reading > was a crime in some societies]. But those methods are not closed to > development. > > Wishing you and your family peace and good health. > > Salam, > Abdalla Alothman > _______________________________________________ > General mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general >
_______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general
