Re: Volunteers, Unicode, previous examples and things

[Meor Ridzuan Meor Yahaya <meor dot ridzuan at gmail dot com>]

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 <abdalla at pheye dot net> 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
> General at arabeyes dot org
> http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>