I am begging people who get people to repeat the Shahada after them (especially if they do it on video dressed as an Azhari) to please get the wording right!
أشهد ألّا (أن لا) إله
Not “anna lā”!
Anna أنّ needs to have an ism, like you see clearly in the second half:
وأشهد أنّ محمداً ﷺ رسولُ الله
So in theory, it’d make sense to say:
[أشهد أنّ اللهَ لا إله إلا هو]
But that’s not how we received it. There’s another way that would also work, and this is actually relevant. It involves something called ضمير الشأن:
[أشهد أنّه لا إله إلا الله]
The ism here isn’t for Allah ﷻ but gives the meaning (if you’re really spelling it out):
“I testify that *it’s the case that* there is no god except Allah.”
That’s the proper way to get from the particle أنّ to the negating لا. But we can also use a lightened form: أنْ which stands in for أنّ+اسم.
(Note: not all أنْ is of this type!)
So this gives us أشهد أنْ لا – then we notice that in pronunciation, we merge that unvowelled nūn into the lām. Hence it’s also accepted to write this in a merged form like this (though there’s a bunch of detail on that we don’t need here).
أشهد ألّا إله إلا الله
🕋
I meant to say here: the pronoun (-hu) isn’t referring to Allah ﷻ. But hopefully you got the point.
“Spooked zebras”?
An enquiry into the language, readings & translation of Q. 74:50
كأنهم حمر مستنفِـَرة
Before we get into the meaning of mustanfirah/mustanfarah, let’s clarify what species we have here. The exegetes clarify it is “wild donkeys/asses”, also called onagers. Though the term حمر الوحش is nowadays used for zebras, those weren’t known to the Arabs of the time.
Therefore it’s not the right translation, and it’s a shame that after being used only by the Egyptian “Montakhab” and a few “Quranists” like Rashad Khalifa, it now appears in the popular Clear Quran translation!
Already in the thread, I shared a few things from the mufassireen which get at the various angles of the question. What I’ll say here is based on 2 or more of those answers.
Firstly I should say that I’m not inclined to the idea that “your Ummah’s sin” is implied. I want to read the ayah as straightforwardly as possible - but also in light of other texts and principles.
Publishers sent me a complimentary copy of this Qur’anic Encyclopædia by Dr M. Tahir-ul-Qadri – may Allah reward them! I’ll share brief first impressions, then say a little on a theological/exegetical issue that caught my eye.
After vol. 1 which is a detailed contents list, there are two parts. Vols. 2-5 present individual ayat under thematic subheadings with translation. This could be suitable for looking up topics, or going through systematically in addition to reading a standard mushaf/translation.
Then vols. 6-8 are a “Comprehensive Index of Qur’anic Words” drawing upon ‘Abd al-Baqi’s المعجم المفهرس and other lexical works. It’s arranged alphabetically, not by root: see here how that looks (unrelated words can appear among different occurrences of “brother”).
Some people asked me to comment on a particular use of a particular ayah by a particular group to support their particular doctrine. And I intend to do that, iA. But I feel that taking a few steps back is helpful before diving in.
Suppose Group A say “This ayah proves our point!” – this is obviously insufficient if there are other ayat which are relevant, especially if some go against that point.
I was preparing something on Q 18:77 and took a look through commentaries on the “wall on the verge of collapsing” which al-Khaḍir set upright. So here’s a thread about majāz…
یُرِیدُ أَن یَنقَضَّ
The ascription of irādah to the wall (literally “wanting to collapse”) is one of the most famous examples of figurative speech in the Qur’an, in which the wall is personified, and “wanting” means it is *about to* crumble to pieces.
I read through Muḥammad al-Amīn al-Shinqīṭī’s discussion in Aḍwāʾ al-Bayān, since he’s a famous recent denier of majāz (following Ibn Taymiyyah and others), and has a separate treatise called Manʿ jawāz al-majāz fī al-munazzal li’l-taʿabbud wa’l-iʿjāz.