This site uses cookies.
Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site,
while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.
For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
This person has a SecurePRO™ card. Because this person is not a ProZ.com Plus subscriber, to view his or her SecurePRO™ card you must be a ProZ.com Business member or Plus subscriber.
Affiliations
This person is not affiliated with any business or Blue Board record at ProZ.com.
Services
Translation, Editing/proofreading, Subtitling
Expertise
Specializes in:
Religion
History
Social Science, Sociology, Ethics, etc.
Philosophy
Poetry & Literature
Rates
Arabic to English - Standard rate: 0.20 USD per word / 25 USD per hour
Payment methods accepted
PayPal, Visa, Wire transfer
Portfolio
Sample translations submitted: 2
Arabic to English: Tafsir Qurtubi Intro General field: Art/Literary Detailed field: Religion
Translation - English In the Name of Allah, the Excessively, Infinitely Merciful.
From Him Alone Do We Seek Help.
And May Allah Send Down Abundant Peace & Blessings Upon Our Leader – Muhammad – and His Family and Companions.
We relate the words of the esteemed jurist, erudite Imam, spiritual practitioner, and Hadīth scholar - Abū ‘Abdillāh Muhammad Ibn Aḥmad Ibn Abī Bakr Ibn Farḥ Al-Anṣārī Al-Khazrajī of Qurṭuba,Andalus for whom we ask Allah to shower with His Infinite Mercy and give residence in His Spacious Garden:
“All praise is due to Allah, the one who praised himself before anyone else could do so. I testify to the fact that there is nothing worthy of worship except for Allah alone, having no partner whatsoever – the Supreme, Unique Lord and Sustainer, the Ever-Living who never dies and Maintainer of all, Possessor of unparalleled Might and Glory, and Bestower of Awesome Gifts who spoke the Qu’rān, created Man, bestowed upon him true faith, and sent His messenger, Muhammad ﷺ, with lucid speech. May Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him as long as the night overtakes the day and the day succeeds the night.
He sent His Prophet ﷺ with the Clear Book, dispelling any doubt. The eloquent could not match it, nor could the intellectuals challenge it. Something similar could not be produced regardless of the resources at the challengers’ disposal. He has made its parables valuable lessons for the one who ponders and its commands guidance for the one with insight. Within it, He has outlined any mandatory decrees, therein clearly defining the permissible and impermissible matters. Stories and counsels are repeated for understanding along with illustrative examples and knowledge of the unseen. Did He not say: ‘We have not omitted a single thing from the Book.’?
Through it, He has addressed those close to Him and clarified for them what He expects whereby they fully comprehended and internalized the message. The reciters of this Qu’rān are the guardians of Allah’s hidden secret and protectors of his concealed knowledge. They are the successors to His Prophets and entrusted ones enjoying His select company with those He has deemed pure and godly. It is reported that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, “Certainly, Allah takes special company for Himself from among us.” His companions then asked, “Who are they?” He ﷺ responded, “The people of Qu’rān are among Allah’s special company.”
It is only natural that the one who truly knows Allah’s book should take heed of its prohibitions and reflect on what has been mentioned in it. He should have the utmost fear and reverence of Allah and be too ashamed to breach what he finds elucidated so clearly therein. This is a grave responsibility seeing as he has been tasked with the load of the Messengers who came before since he now serves as a witness over all those who oppose this religion and follow other than it. Allah says, “Like that, We have made you a just nation that you will be witnesses over all people.”
And know of a surety that the proof against the one who knows and willfully neglects this book is stronger than the one who has limited or no knowledge about it. The Qu’rān will act as a prosecutor and proof against whoever is given knowledge of the Qu’rān and incurs grave sins by not acting in accordance with its prohibitions and mandates. It is reported that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ has said, “The Qu’rān is a proof for or against you.”
Thus, it is incumbent upon everyone who is intimately acquainted with His book to recite it properly, ponder its deeper meanings, and try to understand its marvels as best he can. Allah says, “A Blessed Book We have sent down to you so they may ponder deeply upon its Miraculous Signs.” and “Will they not ponder over the Qu’rān or are there locks on their hearts?”
We ask Allah to make us from those who give the Qu’rān its proper due, reflect upon it adequately, apply its lessons correctly, and fulfill all its requirements while not seeking guidance elsewhere…”
Arabic to English: Logical Fallacies General field: Social Sciences Detailed field: Philosophy
Source text - Arabic تفشت في المناهج الفكرية والفلسفية عمو م ا أغلوطة منطقية أو مغالطة يمكن أن
نطلق عليها مغالطة الثنائيات الحتمية الكاذبة. وهذه المغالطة مفادها أن ت عرض
القضية الفلسفية أ ي اانت على أنها اختيار بين نتيجتين منطقيتين لا ثالث لهما. - -
ويدور الجدل بين متناظرين في آخر طرفي طيف من الأفكار، ال يسعى لإثبات
حجته وإفحام خصمه.
فمث لً، نجد جد لا طوي لً بين أنصار المنهج الموضوعي الذين يقولون أن للأشياء
ماهيات وحقائق طبيعية نصل إليها بالعقل أ ونصار المنهج الذاتي أو المشخصن الذين
يقولون باستحالة الوصول إلى ماهية الأشياء وأن التصورات البشرية عن الأشياء مجرد
خيالات في ذهن الأشخاص، وينتصر فريقين من المفكرين والفلًسفة ا ل لرؤيته. ثم
نلًحظ أنه يندر من يحاول أن يتوسط بين الرأيين بنظرة أو نظرية تجمع بين الحقائق
في الً الطرفين، االذين االوا مث لً بالحقيقة "المشخصنة اجتماع ي ا" بديلً عن الً
الطرفين المذاورين، إعما لا للصواب في ال وجهات النظر وجم ع ا بين الآراء التي توهم
الناس فيها التنااض.
ويتجادل أهل الفلسفة حول ثنائية أخرى يتوهمونها ثنائية حتمية وهي أغلوطة ااذبة،
ألا وهي ثنائية العلم والدين، وهي الثنائية التي حسبها اثر من الناس "متعارضة". بل
وظهرت هذه الثنائية في تراثنا الإسلًمي نفسه باسم "تعارض العقل والنقل" أو
"تعارض الرأي والنص"، على الرغم من ال ما في الإسلًم من ربط بين الإيمان
والعقل مما هو معروف ومشهور. ويتوهم اثر من الناس أن عليهم الاختيار –
5
الحتمي في بين ما هو ديني وما هو علمي، ومعه الاختيار بين المادّي والغيبي، أو بين
المصالح والأخلًق، أو بين المادة والروح، أو غر ذلك من المتقابلًت التي لا تلزم
على أي حال.
فالعلم والدّين اد يتعارضان في مجال معين أو في ب عد ما، من ذلك مثلً أن الدين
يعطي المكانة الأولى للنص الشرعي، في مقابل العلم الذي يعطي المكانة الأولى
للتجربة والملًحظة. ولكن، من اال إن دين الإسلًم وأصل الاعتقاد فيه لا يقوم على
التجربة والملًحظة؟ ومن اال إن إعمال العقل بما وصل إليه العلم ليس له علًاة
بالنص الإلهي؟ إن طريقة القرآن نفسه في إثبات وجود الله تعالى وفي الإيمان بأي -
اضية اانت هي الملًحظة والتفكر والنظر. اال تعالى: "ا ل انْظ روا مَاذَا في -
السَّمَاوَا ت وَالْأَرْ ض "، 1 واال: "مَا تَ رَى في خَلْ ق الرَّحَْْ ن منْ تَ فَا و ت فَارْ ج ع الْبَصَرَ هَلْ
تَ رَى منْ ف ط و ر . ثم ارْ ج ع الْبَصَرَ ارَّتَ ين ي نَْ قَل بْ إ لَيْكَ الْبَصَ ر خَا سئ ا وَ هوَ حَ سر ". 2
ولذلك فقد اان شيخ الإسلًم ابن تيمية موفقا حين عنون اتابه الكبر عن المنطق
والفلسفة بالعنوان التالي: "درء تعارض العقل والنقل أو توافق صحيح المنقول مع
صريح المعقول". 3 ثم إن الدين والعلم على الجانب الآخر متكاملًن في مجالات – -
وجوانب أخرى عديدة، اسعيهما مثلً لتحقيق سعادة البشر، ا وهتمامهما المرازي
بأصل الحياة ونظام الخلق، وما إلى ذلك.
1 سورة يونس، الآية 101 .
2 سورة الملك، الآية 3 و 4 .
3 أحْد بن تيمية، درء تعارض العقل والنقل بر وت: دار الكتب العلميّة، 1997 .
6
ويمكن أن ننظر اذلك إلى العقل المعنوي والمادّة المدراة بالحواس على أنّهما متكاملًن
لا متضادّان. وذلك أننا إذا وسعنا مجال الاعتبار إلى ما وراء الحواس الخمس، أدرانا
أن أحدث نظريّت علم الإدراك وعلوم المخ تنظر إلى العقل والمادّة على أنهما يؤثران
ويتأثران ببعضهما فع لً . وتضرب أمثلة اثر ة لهذا التفاعل بين العقل والمادة في علوم
اليوم، االحدس الذي يهدي الناس إلى الحقائق دون دليل مادي، والأحلًم التي
تتحقق في الوااع، واالعوامل الروحية والنفسية وتأثر ها على المرضى، وما أثر ال رّاية
الشرعية منا ببعيد.
وأصول الفقه الإسلًمي وهي تمثل بكل مدارسها فلسفة للتشريع الإسلًمي، م –
تكن بعيدة عن المناهج الفلسفية المختلفة وأغلوطاتها. فقد ظهرت في بعض نظريت
أصول الفقه في تراثنا مغالطات ثنائية اانت المناظرات والخلًفات تطول حولها، رغم
أن بعض الأصوليين في ال مسألة منها اانوا اد أدراوا ايف يمكن الجمع بين الآراء
المتعارضة في إطار مبدع ومفيد.
من ذلك مث لً اختلًف الأصوليّون في حجّيّة بعض المصادر الثانوية، بين ما يعتبر
حجّة مقبولة للًستدلال، في مقابل ما لا يعتبر حجّة أو يعتبر "باطل" على حد
التعبر الأصولي. وحجّ ية الدليل أساس للحكم الشرعي، بينما الدليل الباطل هو
دليل منقوض في أصله ولا تتوفر له الحجّيّة أصلً تحت أيّ ظرف، وبالتالي لا تنبنى
عليه أحكام شرعية. من أمثلة ذلك اتاب الشافعي حول "بطلًن الاستحسان"،
واتاب داود "إبطال القياس"، واتاب ابن الرّاوندي "إبطال التواتر"، ا وختلًف
7
الشافعية والمالكية حول عمل أهل المدينة بين الحجية والبطلًن، واختلًف الظاهرية
والجعفرية والزيدية مع غر هم حول حجية القياس، إلى آخره.
Translation - English In many strains of intellectual and philosophical thought, certain logical fallacies and falsifications that we may label the ‘either-or’ fallacy have become widespread. This fallacy arises when any philosophical issue is presented as having only two diametrically-opposed arguments without a plausible third. In this case, the debate will center around two views on completely opposite sides of the spectrum with each proponent working to prove his argument and silence his adversary.
For example, we find a long-standing debate between the proponents of objectivism who believe that all things have an essence and natural properties that can be understood through the intellect and the proponents of subjectivism who advocate the impossibility of the intellect to truly understand these things as the human perception of things are mere transitory phantasms in the mind of a person. Here, we have two seemingly diametrically-opposing views with each party working to further their argument. Moreover, it is rare to find anyone who attempts to join between the two extremes with a moderate theory that incorporates the truths of both sides as we have seen from the proponents of “social subjectivism” who claim that group consciousness creates reality. Such a balanced approach is beneficial insomuch as it works to find the truths from a variety of perspectives and create a harmony between opinions which were originally thought of as being incompatible.
We find the philosophers engaging in these ‘false dilemmas’ thinking that there are only two incongruous choices with the validity of one rendering the other null. In reality, these tend to be falling into the logical fallacy we earlier termed the ‘either-or’ fallacy. Take the false dilemma proposition of science versus religion that many people use to show the incompatibility of these two sources of knowledge. We find this proposition in our own Islamic tradition under the title ‘The Incompatibility of Reason and Revelation’ or ‘The Incompatibility of Individual Judgement and Divine Text’ despite all that Islam itself clearly purports in joining between faith and reason. This fallacious proposition leads people to believe they must make a choice between the religious and the secular and all other dichotomies that stem from such a choice like the physical and the metaphysical, personal benefit and godly character, the physical realm and the spiritual realm, and any other supposed opposites that are not actually incompatible in any case.
That is not to say that religion and science cannot be opposed in one particular sphere or dimension at times. To illustrate, religion gives the ultimate precedence to Divinely Revealed text whereas science gives ultimate precedence to experience and observation. However, who is to say that the religion of Islam and its underlying belief structure does not rest on experience and observation? And who is to say that intellectual machinations in analyzing and interpreting information have no relation to Divine Text?
The Qur’ān itself in proving the existence of God and the validity of faith – with all that the issue may entail – utilizes the same principles of observation, thought, and contemplation. Allah states in the Qur’ān: “Say, "Observe what is in the heavens and earth." "You do not see in the creation of the Most Merciful any inconsistency. So return [your] vision [to the sky]; do you see any breaks? Then return [your] vision twice again. [Your] vision will return to you humbled while it is fatigued." Based off this, we can see that Shaykh al-Islām ibn Taymiyya was correct in titling his tome on logic and philosophy ‘Averting the Conflict between Reason and Revelation or The Harmony of Authentic Tradition and Pure Reason”.
Furthermore, science and religion are complimentary in many respects such as their mutual striving for the attainment of human happiness and their central focus on the origin of life and the structure of the universe.
In the same vein, we can look at the abstract intellect and the material world as being complimentary not contradictory. That is because when we expand our considerations to what is beyond the five senses, we find that the newest theories on cognitive functions and the brain view the intellect and matter as actually affecting each other reciprocally. There are many examples of this interplay between the intellect and the physical world in the modern sciences like the intuition that guides people to certain realities without a physical guide, dreams that play out in reality, or spiritual and psychological factors and their effects on the sick. In this last example, we may find the scientific validation of certain spiritual healing practices sanctioned by the Shari̱’a.
When analyzing the underlying principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Uṣūl al-fiqh) which represent the Islamic legal philosophy in the form of multiple schools of thought, we find that they are akin to the differing schools of philosophical thought even sharing in the same logical fallacies. The same ‘either-or’ fallacies can be found in many of the theories of Uṣūl al-fiqh within our own tradition where these false dilemmas served as the basis for long-standing disagreements despite the fact that numerous scholars of Uṣūl al-fiqh managed to brilliantly reconcile between seemingly conflicting stances on numerous occasions.
As an example, we can take the classic disagreement between the Uṣūl al-fiqh scholars concerning the authority of certain secondary arguments (those not derived directly from Qur’ān and Prophetic Tradition) in matters of religious law. The two camps split with some considering them to be acceptable evidences for deriving rulings while others were convinced of the invalidity of such sources being used in making legal rulings. Declaring the authoritative nature of an evidence to be valid makes it a chief component of legal rulings while its invalidity would render it completely useless and without any authority in the scope of religious law-making under any circumstance. Practical examples of these hardline stances are Imām al-Shāfiʿī’s ‘The Invalidity of Juristic Preference’, Dāwūd’s ‘The Invalidity of Analogous Reasoning’, and Ibn al-Rāwandī’s ‘The Invalidity of Excessive Narrations’ as well as the disagreement between the Shāfiʿī school and the Mālikī school regarding the legal weight of the actions of the people of Madīna or the Ẓāhiriyya-Ja’farī-Zaydiyya schools disagreement over the legal validity of analogous reasoning.
More
Less
Experience
Years of experience: 8. Registered at ProZ.com: May 2017.