The seventh word of verse (52:37) is a form II masculine plural active participle and is in the nominative case (مرفوع). The active participle's triliteral root is sīn ṭā rā (س ط ر).
The analysis above refers to the 37th
verse of chapter 52 (sūrat
Sahih International: Or have they the depositories [containing the provision] of your Lord? Or are they the controllers [of them]?
Asim Iqbal 2nd
2nd June, 2011
Root should be : suad ya tuay ra
Form should be : Q.I (i.e. 1st form of the quadriliteral)
Lane's Lexicon doesn't cover root suad ya tuay ra but instead covers siin ya tuay ra and on it in Volume 4, page 1358, column 3 states musaytir with both siin and suad and also states musattir i.e. all 3 words having similar meaning.
Dictionary of the Qur'an also states musaytir as a quad, but uses siin instead of suad.
If with suad and siin the word has the same meaning then why write in strange style with suad and then a small siin on top of this suad is written on some Arabic texts today? Can anyone give any justification?
Ditto my comments at 88:22:3.
Mazhar A. Nurani
سراط - صراط
I recall to have read somewhere that Seen can be substituted with Suad if appears before Toi. Old lexicons include the word under س ط ر
5th June, 2011
Salaam, yes the root here is saad instead of seen and Br. Mazhar is right in saying that sometimes the seen can be replaced with saad if it appears before the emphatic taa. Not sure if elsewhere comments/suggestions have been made about the reason for the two similar letters, but I will briefly add to the discussion. This is one of the ways in which the Qur'an is miraculous in the way it uses Arabic language and here the way the noun is used, either with seen or saad and both have the same meaning in this context. In the science of Tajweed (recitation) there is a tradition of the swapping of letters that are close in sound and place of emanation to accommodate the different types of recitation of the Qur'an- in each case the basic meaning is not changed. There are grammarians and scholars of the Qur'an that say the different letters serve to stylistically and rhetorically add different dimensions of meanings at the level of tafsir when such letter swapping occurs. That being said I think this is the reason that the Classic scholars and grammarians were not confused with the root letters and listed them under whichever root they saw fit. This unique style has been preserved through the script and will remain so, we just have to understand it.
Suad is mentioned in mushafs of today also with a small sin with it, so I think it is not possible to ignore the suad which is part of the word from which the root is extracted and not recommended to remove suad from the root and insert siin into the root while maintaining the word with suad.
As pointed out by brother Mazhar, a similar case is siraat. Here as we see, in the Qur'an it is written with suad and no small siin accompanies it.
so as far as root letter is concerned for this word, will anyone here recommend that it is siin and not suad?
You can sign in to add a message if this information could be improved or requires discussion.
Copyright © Kais
Dukes, 2009-2017. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org. This is an open source project.