happy discovery

After maghrib tonight, I thought to use my cellphone browser to search the web for “Arabic Quran.”

العربية: إعراب لنص قرآني

I found http://corpus.quran.com/, which I’m quite pleased with. For example, see Arabic (العربية) (http://corpus.quran.com/concept.jsp?id=arabic) and
Bird (طائر) (http://corpus.quran.com/concept.jsp?id=bird).

The Quranic Arabic Corpus is “an annotated linguistic resource which shows the Arabic grammar, syntax and morphology for each word in the Holy Quran. The corpus provides three levels of analysis: morphological annotation, a syntactic treebank and a semantic ontology.”

Computer geek stuff (like I’ve been playing with for decades), and the book I’m slowly learning to understand. So, in regards to this, I’m kind of like a cat in catnip. Well, maybe not quite that much.

But I took shahada 2007-07-29, almost five years ago. I have taken an intuitive (for me) and disorganized approach to learning, and this seems just right for me.

So, “with every difficulty, some ease” (http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=94). (Browser issues: display looks good in Firefox 3.6.28 Mac PPC, but almost no Arabic characters displayed in Safari 5.0.6 Mac. No problems noted in Windows.)

And there is even an API: http://corpus.quran.com/java/overview.jsp!

The data for the Qur’an (text) is from http://tanzil.net/ (e.g. http://tanzil.net/#94:6), another very nice site, with lots of options, for display and recitations, for instance. Much to learn.

Alhamdulillah. And I should be off to sleep.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Posted in Arabic, Islam | Leave a comment

Abu Musa

I saw that my friend Masoumeh had changed her profile picture on Facebook.

I consulted Sheikh Google and found:

Map of Strait of Hormuz Español: Mapa del estr...

Map of Strait of Hormuz Español: Mapa del estrecho de Ormuz Русский: Карта Ормузского пролива (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Maritime Boundaries in the Persian Gulf: the case of Tunb and Abu Musa Islands” (http://www.parstimes.com/news/archive/2002/maritime_boundaries.html, retrieved 2012-04-29), which makes what seems a reasonable argument that the islands are Iran’s:

  1. Since ancient times, Iran has been a state.
  2. Iran has always held these islands.
  3. As recently as 1888, maps prepared by Britain, then the dominant imperial power, unambiguously showed the islands as Iranian.
  4. Claims by Sharjah, one of the Emirates (and therefore the UAE), to the islands are specious because when the claims were advanced, Sharjah was not “an emirate of territorial dimension to be able to claim offshore territories.”
  5. Therefore, the islands are sovereign territory of Iran.

(Of course, I am not a lawyer!)

ABU DHABI, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES - APRIL 08:  U...

ABU DHABI, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES - APRIL 08: U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates (2nd L) meets with Mohammed bin Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan (2nd R), the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi and Deputy Supreme Commander of the United Arab Emirates Armed Forces, U.S. Ambassador to the UAE Richard Olson (L) and UAE Ambassador to the U.S. Yousef Al Otaiba (R) at the crown prince's home, the Mina Palace, April 8, 2011 in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Gates visited Saudi Arabia and Iraq on this trip and will discuss the bilateral defense, and the unrest that is gripping the Mideast and Iran with the crown prince. (Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)

Of course, I would be interested to read a clear statement of UAE’s claim to the islands. Clearly, though both parties could reasonably claim “we want the oil,” that motivation would not hold up in an impartial court. Though a cynic could assert that the term “impartial court” would have no objective meaning in this context.

ABU MUSA: Island Dispute Between Iran and the UAE” (http://www1.american.edu/ted/abumusa.htm, retrieved 2012-04-29) discusses recent history and geopolitical significance, but advances no arguments of international law.

I just linked my friend Jerome’s blog entry on radical vs. moderate Islam (http://4squareviews.com/2012/04/26/history-of-the-modern-middle-east-lecture-1-introductory-concepts-4/, retrieved 2012-04-29), which he identifies as an extract of a course from Columbia University. Making use of that article’s conceptual analysis, the practical argument of UAE (and the US) could boil down to:

  1. UAE is an ally of the US and SA.
  2. Therefore, UAE is moderate Islam.
  3. Iran is not pro-American.
  4. Therefore, Iran is radical Islam.
  5. We favor moderate Islam over radical Islam.
  6. Therefore, the case of Tunb and Abu Musa Islands should be decided in favor of UAE.
  7. Therefore, the islands should be classified as sovereign territory of the United Arab Emirates.

On further thought, I remembered Sun Tzu on the subject of land (https://www.facebook.com/#!/notes/gordon-houtman/art-of-war-excerpt/3816191443232, retrieved 2012-04-29). In the excerpt, Sun Tzu counsels that it is never acceptable for a state to compromise on land, but he also states elsewhere that a state never benefits from prolonged war.

For there has never been a protracted war from which a country has benefited.

May Allah be pleased with the believers of every nation.

If two parties among the Believers fall into a quarrel, make ye peace between them: but if one of them transgresses beyond bounds against the other, then fight ye (all) against the one that transgresses until it complies with the command of Allah; but if it complies, then make peace between them with justice, and be fair: for Allah loves those who are fair (and just).

al Qur’an, surah 49, ayah 9

Happy birthday, Mom!

Enhanced by Zemanta
Posted in Iran, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates | 1 Comment

Brochure: What is Islam?

Some months ago, I edited a text that objectively explains Islam in clear English. You can read that short description of Islam at http://www.marifatalislam.com/. It is also available as a flier (for 8½ × 14–inch paper, 2 sides, as an Adobe .PDF or Word .DOC file).

Enjoy!

Posted in Islam | Leave a comment

Books on Islam

Last night, I selected some books about Islam on amazon.com, and made it into a “Listmania! list,” consisting of four English translations of the Qur’an, a short book of hadith, a biography of the Prophet, and a textbook on Islam.

Posted in Islam | Leave a comment

Sudan: History of a Broken Land

I’ve just finished watching a beautiful, informative film about Sudan, where a referendum on independence for the South is about to be held.

As a recent Muslim, I interact with many people from the Sudan and surrounding nations at Dar al Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church, Virginia, near my home.

As a cab driver, I am a peer of many people from Africa, Christian as well as Muslim and followers of other religions.

The Holy Qur’an says:

O people! We created you from one man and one woman and made you branches and tribes that you may recognize one another. Undoubtedly, the most respected among you in the sight of Allah is he who is more pious, verily, Allah is knowing, Aware.

–Surah 49, ayah 13

Following John Lennon, I don’t trust governments. I don’t trust news media, whether Fox or the vast “liberal media conspiracy” they like to deride. I don’t trust religions or religious leaders. But I trust Scripture(s), which God has given to all humans for guidance. And I trust people, speaking in their own voices, speaking about their own personal situations.

May the people of Sudan find a way forward in relative peace and harmony, in accord with what Mohandas Gandhi called swaraj.

I recommend this film to all my friends. It is about the length of an hour-long TV special, without all the ads. It seems to be fair and balanced, and to incorporate voices from many sides of recent Sudanese history. There are many beautiful scenes, cultures, and peoples. May Allah bless Al Jazeera for producing such a beautiful documentary, which brought tears to my eyes.

The Believers are but a single Brotherhood:
So make peace and reconciliation between your two contending brothers;
And fear Allah, that ye may receive Mercy.

–Surah Al Hujurat (49:10)

Posted in Islam, Sudan | Leave a comment

the Good Book

When I first read the Bible, I was an atheist. As a scientifically minded young person, I thought that cosmology and evolution provided a clear description of how the world came to be, and that religion was just superstition.

King James Bible

King James Bible

I argued with classmates, most of whom were Christian, about religion. One classmate finally convinced me that if I were to approach the question “scientifically,” then I would want to examine all the evidence, including the evidence for competing hypotheses. She stated that the evidence for faith is the Bible. Different people could say all sorts of things: some wise, some foolish, but the Christian claim is that the Holy Bible is the revealed Word of God. You don’t have to believe it to read it. You can doubt it. Just approach it as you would approach any other book, with an open mind (and with a recognition that it was written long ago, so it doesn’t follow the “rules” of most books).

Once I accepted that argument, the next argument was mainly among the Christians, with me on the sidelines as an interested observer. What translation should the non-believer read? This was an important question, because Christian translations of the Bible differ. Many translations are in good modern English and are very popular, but their words seem to support theological opinions that did not exist back when the original words were written. As a group, my Christian classmates did not want to recommend that a non-believer read a sectarian translation.

The Catholic Christians among my classmates pointed out that Protestant Bibles leave out the deuterocanonical books, which were accepted as part of the Bible until the Protestant Reformation. These Christians wished to advise me that a standard Protestant Bible is incomplete, according to the understanding of the early Christians.

From all of this, my classmates were able to agree only on the King James Bible of 1611. Although it is a Protestant translation, it does include the deuterocanonical books. Although its English is almost 400 years old, its translation does not suffer from doctrinal distortions, as so many recent translations do.

So I read the King James Bible, cover to cover (over the course of several years). I learned a lot of practical information about how people and the world work, that I never understood from cosmology or evolution. I learned a lot about the American society that I live in, that was inexplicable without the Bible, but obvious in its light.

So to any non-believers out there, I’d say, “read the Bible.” Never mind faith; maybe that will come later, and maybe it won’t. You have free will, after all. (No one can force you to believe, if you don’t want to.) Never mind that it’s an old book; none of the newer books provide the practical understanding of the world that the Bible offers. Never mind the loudmouth evangelical Christians, who want you to read their “proving texts” in the New Testament, and dismiss the Old Testament as superfluous. If you want to understand the world, the whole Bible is an intensely useful book.

However, after I finished reading the King James Version, I was still somewhat confused, from all the thou’s and begat’s and other “old style” English. I’d gotten the message, but I still had a lot of questions. Enter the New Jerusalem Bible.

The Bible is an old book, and it reflects practical reality of two thousand and more years ago. Human nature has not changed at all in two thousand years, and the Bible shows human nature (good, bad, ugly, and beautiful) more clearly than anything else shows human nature. However, countless details of the world have changed over the millennia (for example, money and electricity).

New Jerusalem Bible

New Jerusalem Bible

The King James Version, like the New Jerusalem Bible, is an unbiased translation. But the New Jerusalem Bible is written in clear modern English (without the thou’s and begat’s). What’s more, the New Jerusalem Bible has excellent study notes to help you understand the details of the old world, so you’re not left with doubts about details. When something wouldn’t make sense to a modern reader, because it was a different world back then, the New Jerusalem Bible provides a footnote, explaining the facts of the world back then, or the reason why a word was translated the way it was.

If you are a skeptic, or if you want to understand your Christian faith, I recommend this Bible. If you are a member of another faith, I recommend this translation of the Christian Holy Book to you. It will help you understand Christians, and when they fall short of their faith (as they often do), you will be better able to hold them to account if you can quote chapter and verse of their holy book to them.

The philosopher Pascal said that if there is no God, then there is no penalty for being wrong about whether or not he exists. On the other hand, if there is a god, there could be adverse consequences for being wrong about that. So, logically, Pascal thought one should believe, just looking at it as a gambling proposition.

If that seems offensive as an argument for belief, it’s still a valid logical point. Anyway, there are a lot of Christians in this world, and if only to understand their worldview, and to encourage them to follow the good in their belief, I recommend everyone (especially Christians) read the Bible.

Posted in Atheism, Christianity | Leave a comment