coming back to alahazrat's translation, let us try the correlation method: from kanz: ==== وَمَاۤ أَرۡسَلۡنَا مِن قَبۡلِكَ مِن رَّسُولࣲ وَلَا نَبِیٍّ aur hum nay tum say pahlay jitnay rasul ya nabiy bhejay And We have not sent before you, from a Messenger or a Prophet إِلَّاۤ إِذَا تَمَنَّىٰۤ sab par kabhi yeh waqi'ah guzraa jab unhon ne padha, except that [sometimes] when they recited أَلۡقَى ٱلشَّیۡطَـٰنُ فِیۤ أُمۡنِیَّتِهِۦ toh shayTaan ne unkay padhnay mein, logon par kuch apni taraf say mila diya the Devil sneaked alongside [the Prophet’s] recitation, upon the people something from his own side. فَیَنسَخُ ٱللَّهُ مَا یُلۡقِی ٱلشَّیۡطَـٰنُ toh miTaa detaa hai Allah us shayTaan kay Daalay huway ko So Allāh will efface that which shayţān has slipped in ثُمَّ یُحۡكِمُ ٱللَّهُ ءَایَـٰتِهِ phir Allah apni aayaten pakki kardetaa hai and [Allāh will] make His verses clear. وَٱللَّهُ عَلِیمٌ حَكِیمࣱ aur Allah ilm o Hikmat wala hai And Allāh is the Knower, the Wise ==== the objection (see img below) whereas, alahazrat's translation should read: "except that [sometimes] when they recited, the Devil sneaked alongside [the Prophet’s] recitation, upon the people something from his own side." the urdu does not say inserted in the Prophet's ﷺ recitation. ----- "added something from his own side in their recital towards the people" (objected upon english trans) is also not as ugly as the devbandi haasid makes out to be. at worst, it is ambiguous. it does not suggest that it was issued from the Prophet's ﷺ blessed mouth. the ugly meaning concocted by mr.ahmaq is due to the filth inside a devbandi. it is rich coming from a cult who waste their lives trying to prove that ضال in surah duha means astray! these low lives lecturing us on ismatu'l anbiya is similar to isr@eli propaganda. he juxtaposes with taqi usmani's transln. i hope he shows this to zameel who can help identify which words correspond in the aayat with the translation. "satan cast doubts in the hearts of opponents) about what he recited." [taqi] in the above post the devbandi lied. nowhere did alahazrat say what the muftari accuses him of. in truth, alahazrat's translation conveys the meaning and remains close to the arabic wording. obviously a tafsir is required. if the ahmaq devbandi is so confident, let him get a fatwa on the urdu translation of alahazrat whether it is an attack on ismatu'l anbiya. i suggest again one should read about the issue i have translated in appendix (see link above) of sharif risalah translation for a good understanding and then read alahazat's translation. ---- let us see what devbandi kingpins translated. first is mahmud al-hasan devbandi, apparently the first student of devband and later its rector/principal. here the devbandi accuses prophets of becoming confused by the devil: "mila diya uskay khayal mein" tut. tut. --- rafi usmani "the Devil whispered something or the other in it" this is also ambiguous. and unless pointed out, one reads it as the waswasah afflicting the prophet's reading. blind devbandis don't see this. ---- thanawi is far better, and clarifies that the doubts are put in the hearts of kuffar; but the translation should be measured according to zameel's standards - ask him which word corresponds to which in the ayah. while the translation remains decent, the point of trans is lost. ------- come back to alahazrat's translation: shaytan ne unkay padhnay mein logon par kuch apni taraf se mila diya thanawi's is close but too wordy.
the poster cleverly uses the english translation to attack alahazrat. clearly, it is dishonest to accuse alahazrat on the basis of the english translation. -- regardless, we will examine this in sha'Allah. but before that, we need to know something about this verse which has been misused and misquoted by enemies to malign and misrepresent islam and the qur'an by christening false stories as 'satanic verses'. i have explained this issue in detail in the appendix of my translation of sharif jurjani's risalah on usul al-hadith. see here: https://www.ridawipress.org/wp-content/uploads/risalah-sharif.pdf scholars have explained these verses (surah hajj and surah najm) and rejected the lies circulated on this topic. do read and share the full appendix of the above work
if there is a fault in english, it cannot be blamed on alahazrat. we have consistently refuted our own folk to not indulge in translations without knowledge. in this case, anyone who is not familiar with tafasir should not attempt an english trans. the late prof. farid's translwation is not only substandard from a linguistic perspective, but also riddled with major errors; there are serious mistakes and should be stopped publishing and but these are translator's mistakes. not those of alahazrat or sadru'l afadil. the devbandi with his puerile objections talks about sadru'sh shariah mawlana amjad ali as if he is were an average desi maulvi like kandhlawi or his teacher thanawi. we will see soon the level of scholarship of our ulama, but for now, let us focus on kanz ---- 100%. i am ready to compare any other urdu translation with alahzrat's translation to prove the superiority of kanz. in fact, i have written a small article on this with samples. i say this with confidence after decades of comparing translations & more than dozen famous tafasir. ==== check out: refulgent treasure on the superiority of kanzul iyman among urdu translations. https://ridawipress.org/wp-content/uploads/refulgent-treasure.pdf please share this on the ahmaq's timeline, so that neutral folks are not misled by his slander. and i am willing to go thru' this one as well. we have previously smacked the shameless zameel for his audacious attempt to fault kanz. we demonstrated here: https://sunniport.com/index.php?threads/kanzul-iman.14303/#post-81394 === sunni ulama have written volumes refuting stupid and mendacious objections of dev-bandis. when devbandi hamqa thought they could fault kanz to hide the flaws of their akabir, find refutations of their objections here: https://www.ridawi.org/download-books-on-alahazrat/#defence-kanz ===== this was said to prove the imam's erudition and power of recall. not that he translated out of his whims and fancies. and the breadth of his learning. this is why superficial translations (devbandi akabir & asaghir included) fail to capture the essence of the msg. وبالله التوفيق ==== same thing. alahazrat's knowledge of the qur'an was so deep that he didn't have to fumble and struggle. this comes with reading repeatedly and a lot on the subject. ==== we will now come to the actual objection which i think are frail attempts of some foolish devbandi in urdu being translated on twitter
ahqar or ahmaq? tarjama and not tarjuma. pahlay urdu seekh lo, phir asatizah ke kalam par harf rakhna. --- fact: alahazrat's tarjama is kanzul iyman. any english translation of urdu is not alahazrat's fault. we have distanced from all such faulty translations.
more threads: https://x.com/ridawipress/status/1811880791586275721 https://x.com/ridawipress/status/1811958285903298694 https://x.com/ridawipress/status/1811986206478971013 https://x.com/ridawipress/status/1811946037113651213
https://x.com/ridawipress/status/1811865171209650416 https://x.com/ridawipress/status/1811887423359713684 someone copy the tweets in a separate thread.
i read thru' the thread looks like zameel has delegated his hitjob profession it to some cheaper mercenary who cannot even read properly. ha ha.
ahqar among the ahmaq, ajhal, akhdhal and akhbath folk jhoota and makkar like all devbandis ---- the khabeeth is like israeli propaganda - pick up a faulty translation of kanz al iyman and attack alahazrat. the purported english translation of kanz is NOT alahazrat's work. ---
https://x.com/ibn_fakhruddin/status/1811579533306282427 I'd appreciate anyone who refute this thread^
