Refquran2021

39:38:Sam'sNote-Arabic:mutawakkilūn-3:159 . Arabic: mutawakkilūn — those who place their trust. Clearly, every man places his trust in something whether he understands or admits that fact to himself or not — so something more than those who place their trust must be meant. After consideration of all instances (3:159, 12:67, 14:12, 39:38) it is clear that what is meant is those who would place their trust aright (i.e. they intend to place it where it is justified). The following verse argues in favour of such a course. All instances appear in the notes and reference this verse(3:160). (Google translate no guarantee:Bn: আরবি: মুতাওয়াক্কিলুন — যারা তাদের আস্থা রাখে।  স্পষ্টতই, প্রত্যেক মানুষই কোনো কিছুর ওপর তার আস্থা রাখে, সে সেই সত্যটি নিজের কাছে বোঝে বা স্বীকার করুক বা না করুক — তাই যারা তাদের বিশ্বাস করে তাদের থেকে আরও বেশি কিছু বোঝাতে হবে।  সমস্ত দৃষ্টান্ত বিবেচনা করার পর (3:159, 12:67, 14:12, 39:38) এটা স্পষ্ট যে যা বোঝানো হয়েছে তারাই যারা তাদের বিশ্বাসকে সঠিকভাবে স্থাপন ক...

39:32-Note of Sam-"al kāfirūn"(2:19) ।।। Arabic: al kāfirūn. Typically rendered the unbelievers. See note to 2:19 and Notepad II.iii-sam. . Qur’anic definition: al kāfirūn. Typically rendered the unbelievers, the rejecters, or the infidels. Verses 2:8-20 focus upon a single term — al kāfirūn — and, according to my analysis, define it. To claim al kāfirūn as the unbelievers, the rejecters, or the infidels as per the Traditionalist’s contention may be right in a highly specialised sense, but that sense is now long lost. The Qur’anic definition restores and revives the term fully. Of the terms defined in the first pages of al baqarah it is al kāfirūn which is treated most comprehensively; perhaps because it is precisely this category of person which is most pernicious and destructive. Verses 2:8-20, then, comprehensively fix the correct definition of al kāfirūn which may be summarised (based on the Qur’anic treatment) as follows: they claim to believe in God when they are not am...

Note on "alaysa"(أَلَيْسَ)-sam All instances in the text appear in the notes. "alaysa" 6:30, 6:53, 11:78, 11:81, 29:68, 39:32, 39:36, 39:37, 39:60, 43:51, 46:34, 75:40, 95:8. The translators frequently seem to miss a part of its function. They render it as a bare negative interrogative: Is this not the  truth? (Either a or b could have been the truth. It happens to be a and we all agree.) However, the contexts show that its role in the argument is more subtle. There is an element of correction of a misplaced  assumption or misconception: Is then this not the truth? (You had thought a was the truth, but actually it was b, and b is hereby  demonstrated, in fact, to be the truth.) Of course, depending on context the first reading performs the same function as the second. However, with the added then the  emphasis remains constant, and there is perceptible tipping of an argument in favour of the point being made by means of a  requisite rhetorical flourish. (Google ...