-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Best Qur'an Translation?
- Thread starter Rival
- Start date
I recommend reading any religious text in it's original language if at all possible.
Last edited:
Yusuf Ali, because earlier translations didn't have sufficient knowledge of English to convey meaning, and later translations garble the accepted meanings for the purpose of post-hoc rationalisation to a greater extent.
In my opinion.
This is also one I'm familiar with.
For looking up particular suras, I look at multiple translations because they differ and I have no way of knowing which is more precise. My classic example of differences is 17:104
Sahih International: And We said after Pharaoh to the Children of Israel, "Dwell in the land, and when there comes the promise of the Hereafter, We will bring you forth in [one] gathering."
Pickthall: And We said unto the Children of Israel after him: Dwell in the land; but when the promise of the Hereafter cometh to pass We shall bring you as a crowd gathered out of various nations.
Yusuf Ali: And We said thereafter to the Children of Israel, "Dwell securely in the land (of promise)": but when the second of the warnings came to pass, We gathered you together in a mingled crowd.
Shakir: And We said to the Israelites after him: Dwell in the land: and when the promise of the next life shall come to pass, we will bring you both together in judgment.
Muhammad Sarwar: We told the Israelites after this to settle in the land until Our second promise will come true. We would then gather them all together (on the Day of Judgment).
Mohsin Khan: And We said to the Children of Israel after him: "Dwell in the land, then, when the final and the last promise comes near [i.e. the Day of Resurrection or the descent of Christ ['Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) on the earth]. We shall bring you altogether as mixed crowd (gathered out of various nations).[Tafsir Al-Qurtubi, Vol. 10, Page 338]
Arberry: And We said to the Children of Israel after him, 'Dwell in the land; and when the promise of the world to come comes to pass, We shall bring you a rabble.'
Sahih International: And We said after Pharaoh to the Children of Israel, "Dwell in the land, and when there comes the promise of the Hereafter, We will bring you forth in [one] gathering."
Pickthall: And We said unto the Children of Israel after him: Dwell in the land; but when the promise of the Hereafter cometh to pass We shall bring you as a crowd gathered out of various nations.
Yusuf Ali: And We said thereafter to the Children of Israel, "Dwell securely in the land (of promise)": but when the second of the warnings came to pass, We gathered you together in a mingled crowd.
Shakir: And We said to the Israelites after him: Dwell in the land: and when the promise of the next life shall come to pass, we will bring you both together in judgment.
Muhammad Sarwar: We told the Israelites after this to settle in the land until Our second promise will come true. We would then gather them all together (on the Day of Judgment).
Mohsin Khan: And We said to the Children of Israel after him: "Dwell in the land, then, when the final and the last promise comes near [i.e. the Day of Resurrection or the descent of Christ ['Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) on the earth]. We shall bring you altogether as mixed crowd (gathered out of various nations).[Tafsir Al-Qurtubi, Vol. 10, Page 338]
Arberry: And We said to the Children of Israel after him, 'Dwell in the land; and when the promise of the world to come comes to pass, We shall bring you a rabble.'
Augustus
…
Arberry as it tries to stay closest to the original text and grammar and uses less interpolation and exegetical interpretation.
It’s often considered the best non-Muslim translation by Muslim and secular scholars, and translations by Muslims often make more of an attempt to portray things in a theologically correct manner (often by adding stuff in brackets that isn’t in the original text).
It’s often considered the best non-Muslim translation by Muslim and secular scholars, and translations by Muslims often make more of an attempt to portray things in a theologically correct manner (often by adding stuff in brackets that isn’t in the original text).
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
One may like to access and read one of my old posts #116 in RF :
How to read Quran to understand it correctly
I hope it won’t be off-topic.
Since there has been a lot of discussion on Quran from many angles from the friends in the forum I suggest that one has to adopt a proper measure to understand the truthful scripture Quran, if one is interested. It is not like reading a novel or a story-book.
One should be clear of any bias while reading Quran.
Kindly start studying Quran from the beginning to the end, then read it again please and have a note-book with you while intently reading it. One should write down the valid question/s arising in one’s mind very naturally, this is not prohibited.
If the context makes the questions clear or one realizes that one’s question is not valid, one could delete it and proceed further. This may take sometime of course, but it is worthwhile trying it, after all it is an oft quoted book of an important world religion.
I think it is not difficult to understand the verses by using a common sense approach which is generally helpful for understanding any book in the world.
A single verse without the text and the context could be sometimes or most of the time misleading.
One cannot correctly understand the meaning of a word unless one knows the whole sentence in which it has been used. The value of a sentence could be best understood in a passage, and of a passage is best understood in a chapter. The reference with the context is therefore most essential for a meaningful understanding.
This helps to understand the verses, hence Quran is self-explanatory.
Quran in the very beginning makes it known that it is a book for guidance to humanity to the righteous one’s and as such it should be referred to in the ethical, moral and spiritual matters. Why persist to use it otherwise?
Another thing is that science is never final in anything, there is always a room for improvement in knowledge of science, nobody has closed yet the book of science, so why at all compare it with Quran.
Quran leaves the field of science open for search and research for the believers and the non-believers alike, it does not block science for investigation or oppose it.
Science does not have any absolute realities, it is a tool of human beings for physical advancements and with the available data it searches and researches till it matches with the nature, nature is the master corrector.
Nature existed when humans had virtually no knowledge of science, and science is subject to improvement as and when new data is obtained. It has no claims to perfectness.
It is therefore futile to look for any scientific mistakes in Quran, there is none there.
It provides guidance on ethical, moral and spiritual matters. Quran does not want that it should be believed only as a book of authority from an authority.
It provides the wisdom to a thing/commandment and reasonable arguments, in a way, that it is not a tedious book like the books of philosophy which are full with difficult terminology not understood by the common man. It mentions wisdom for the Philosophers, experts and the common people all at one and the same time, as it is guidance for everybody.
I think it is appropriate here to suggest an on-line website for studying the same:
The Holy Quran with English, Spanish, French, German, Urdu translation – Koran Online
It is true that Quran if read in the Arabic language a little loudly in a manner that it does not disturb others has its own spell-bound charm, that cannot be denied.
Nevertheless, its real charm is in its profound system of meaning conveyed in its message, one could benefit from it, in any language. Where-ever the translator has not been able to comprehend the meaning correctly, one could check the original Arabic word and find its etymology, available online.
I have personal experience of this, people borrow questions from unfriendly websites, but when referred to Quran, for the text and context, the questions become irrelevant and invalid.
I may add here that all translations, in fact, are commentaries as one could translate only to the extent one understands, if one does not understand fully one’s translation would be defective to that extent.
As is evident translations of Quran are not the real words of God, that is factual and reasonable, that does not mean that Quran should not be translated for understanding it.
When one has finished it, we can compare our notes with one another.
However there is no compulsion to read it, if one is happy not reading it, one may not read it.
Right, please?
Regards
_____________
[54:18]وَ لَقَدۡ یَسَّرۡنَا الۡقُرۡاٰنَ لِلذِّکۡرِ فَہَلۡ مِنۡ مُّدَّکِرٍ ﴿۱۸﴾
And indeed We have made the Qur’an easy to understand and to remember. But is there anyone who would receive admonition?
The Holy Quran – Chapter: 54: Al-Qamar
Last edited:
I tend to go for Yusif Ali because it has a good reputation and its the version I'm most familiar with.
I picked Al-Hilali and Khan.
Some say it 's a more extreme translation, and that might be. But I spot-checked it against two other translations and I found them all very similar.
I don't care that much about how "holy men" interpret scripture. I'm much more interested in how reading scripture impacts average readers, and (and last time I checked), the Khan translation has been printed and distributed more than other translation, so presumably, it's having the biggest impact on the world.
Some say it 's a more extreme translation, and that might be. But I spot-checked it against two other translations and I found them all very similar.
I don't care that much about how "holy men" interpret scripture. I'm much more interested in how reading scripture impacts average readers, and (and last time I checked), the Khan translation has been printed and distributed more than other translation, so presumably, it's having the biggest impact on the world.
InvestigateTruth
Veteran Member
Sale and Rodwell. I find them closer to the literal words, and less effected by the interpretations and opinions. Most other translations, are not literal word for word, but rather whatever the translator thinks is the intention of the verse.
muhammad_isa
Well-Known Member
I've always used Pickthall.
I don't claim it to be the best translation, and it doesn't contain many footnotes..
I like it because it is concise, and he is a recent English convert.
I read it alongside the Arabic script.
He had to emigrate [to India] due to WWI, and the troubles with Ottoman Empire .. the translation was completed while in India.
It's served me well for 45 years
Many Muslims regard 'Sahih International' as authoritative.
I'm not personally familiar with it, but have no reason to think it's inaccurate.
Arberry and Rodwell .. hmmm, not sure about those.
They are non-Muslim academics.
This is the one I have.
There are many excellent translations of the Qur’án but it must be remembered that once it’s in English it becomes an interpretation because ONLY the Arabic contains ALL the meanings intended.
And there are bad interpretations such as ‘do not make friends with Christian’s’ but cross checking with other versions really meant not to become affiliated or under their moral codes as some Muslim laws were not observed by Christians.
Often one has to refer to many translations to make sure of the correct meaning.
But to know Arabic is best.
And there are bad interpretations such as ‘do not make friends with Christian’s’ but cross checking with other versions really meant not to become affiliated or under their moral codes as some Muslim laws were not observed by Christians.
Often one has to refer to many translations to make sure of the correct meaning.
But to know Arabic is best.
This. There is absolutely no way to completely maintain the meanings and expressions of the Qur'an in a translation; approximation or interpretation of meaning is bound to occur at one point or another.
Dante's Inferno can't be fully preserved outside of Italian, and ditto for Shakespeare's sonnets outside of English. The Qur'an is in the category of works that can't be fully appreciated outside of the original language.
But if I'm going to use it just to learn about Islam and its laws etc. from the primary source and discuss it with Muslims and compare/contrast with Jewish and Christian scriptures and just to refer to when looking up verses etc.
Then yeah, I would assume a reliable translation should be enough for that, with a few potential exceptions (e.g., when it comes to especially nuanced verses).
What do you think of this version? The Qur'an (Oxford World's Classics): Amazon.co.uk: Haleem, M. A. S. Abdel: 9780199535958: Books
Surah Al-A'raf - 1-206 - Quran.com (example)
It's the one @Vouthon and I use and I'd like your take on it, as an Arabic speaker.
I read until about halfway through the surah, and it looks quite accurate. My only comment is about 7:40, where the word for "thick rope" in classical Arabic is also the one for "camel." The idiom is similar to "this will happen when pigs fly." Here, the verse states that a certain group of people will not enter heaven "until the camel [or thick rope, depending on interpretation and subsequent translation] passes through the eye of a needle."
The translation still conveys the general meaning, but it misses the finer nuance and the lack of consensus on whether the word is intended in the verse to mean "camel" or "thick rope."