For Pacifica - random quotes on Arabic and Qur'an

[Pacifica]

Sorry for the silence, Covid paid me a visit.
I honestly can’t tell how I would have read it spontaneously, but the suggested vocalization makes mor sense to me. موصول is a technical term in علم الحديث describing when a chain of transmission is uninterrupted all the way to the source (if memory serves), so it would make sense that it is here used as an adjective describing the أخبار

As for الإسناد بالإسناد it reminds me of this hadith:
لَتَتَّبِعُنَّ سَنَنَ مَن قَبْلَكُمْ شِبْرًا بشِبْرٍ، وَذِرَاعًا بذِرَاعٍ، حتَّى لو سَلَكُوا جُحْرَ ضَبٍّ لَسَلَكْتُمُوهُ، قُلْنَا: يا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ، اليَهُودَ وَالنَّصَارَى؟ قالَ: فَمَنْ؟
where شبرا بشبر, ذراعا بذراع means something like ’exactly’ ’painstakingly’ etc. so I think what is meant by مصولة الإسناد بالإسناد is that isnad after isnad, accounts of his noble character are constantly confirmed.

Thanks!

I'm not sure about the next bit, either:

وشهرت آثار كرمه شهرة واضحة الإشهاد

"and the reports of whose generosity have spread with a fame (or a spreading) clear 'in the calling to witness'" what does واضحة الإشهاد really mean? Something like "that can clearly (reliably?) be called to witness"?

 

[interprete]

Thanks!

I'm not sure about the next bit, either:

وشهرت آثار كرمه شهرة واضحة الإشهاد

"and the reports of whose generosity have spread with a fame (or a spreading) clear 'in the calling to witness'" what does واضحة الإشهاد really mean? Something like "that can clearly (reliably?) be called to witness"?

وآثار = and the signs
كرمه = of his generosity
شُهِرَت = were/became known
شُهرةً واضحةَ الإشهاد = [describing the verb شهرت] a clearly testifiable fame.
Yes the literal idea is ’that can be called to witness’ but I don’t think the causative nuance is really the intended meaning here. The idea is that he is famous for his generosity, and anyone could testify to his undeniable fame in this regard.

 

[interprete]

وآثار = and the signs
كرمه = of his generosity
شُهِرَت = were/became known
شُهرةً واضحةَ الإشهاد = [describing the verb شهرت] a clearly testifiable fame.
Yes the literal idea is ’that can be called to witness’ but I don’t think the causative nuance is really the intended meaning here. The idea is that he is famous for his generosity, and anyone could testify to his undeniable fame in this regard.

By the way, I don’t think ’making someone do something’ is described as a causative verb, there is a better word for that, if I’m not mistaken. I can’t remember it though...

 

[Pacifica]

By the way, I don’t think ’making someone do something’ is described as a causative verb, there is a better word for that, if I’m not mistaken. I can’t remember it though...

Hm? I would have called that a causative verb too.

وتحلت الأيام بحلى فضله

"whith the ornament of whose virtue the days are (were?) adorned"

Does تحلت have a past-tense meaning here? It would seem so from the context but maybe I'm misunderstanding.

 

[interprete]

ايام commonly refers to a chronicle or a biography, so I think the reference here is to his life so far = his life has been adorned with three ornaments of his virtue. IIRC حلى is the plural of ,حلية.
As for the tense, English present perfect works great here, in French I'd use either the present or passé composé. But you are right, this is often a valid question.

 

[Pacifica]

his life so far

But this guy was no longer the caliph at the time of writing, and I presume he was dead.

 

[Pacifica]

a chronicle or a biography

I guess that could be the explanation: his biography is still now adorned with the ornaments of his virtue even though his life itself is over?

 

[Pacifica]

Or maybe not even his "biography" technically speaking but his life as people remember it.

 

[kizolk]

By the way, I don’t think ’making someone do something’ is described as a causative verb, there is a better word for that, if I’m not mistaken. I can’t remember it though...

In Japanese the usual term is factitive.

 

[interprete]

But this guy was no longer the caliph at the time of writing, and I presume he was dead.

Oops sorry I thought he was still alive. In this case you should definitely use the past then.

 

[interprete]

I guess that could be the explanation: his biography is still now adorned with the ornaments of his virtue even though his life itself is over?

I'm not sure I follow. Are we on the same page that تحلت is the past tense 3rd person feminine (of تَحَلّىَ)?

 

[Pacifica]

Sorry, I was confused. The initial ت made me think the verb was present tense but of course this ت is something else.

 

[interprete]

تَحَلّىَ يَتَحَلّى تَحَلٍّ the verb is

 

[Pacifica]

ورتع الأنام في ظل رفقه وعدله

"in the shade of whose gentleness and fairness mankind reveled"?

I'm not entirely sure of the meaning of ظل (polysemous word, though I take it meanings like "protection" all derive from the basic meaning "shade"?) and the exact nuance of رتع.

 

[interprete]

ورتع الأنام في ظل رفقه وعدله

"in the shade of whose gentleness and fairness mankind reveled"?

I'm not entirely sure of the meaning of ظل (polysemous word, though I take it meanings like "protection" all derive from the basic meaning "shade"?) and the exact nuance of رتع.

Never heard of رتع and I can't check right now, but في ظل is indeed in the shade of/under the protection of, in other contexts it can also be 'in the context of'.

 

[Pacifica]

الذي فل حد الشرك صدق عزائمه

What does صدق عزائمه mean? Literally I get something like "with the truth/sincerity of his resolutions" but I'm not sure what the idea precisely is.

 

[interprete]

الذي فل حد الشرك صدق عزائمه

What does صدق عزائمه mean? Literally I get something like "with the truth/sincerity of his resolutions" but I'm not sure what the idea precisely is.

I think this is the subject, the final ه referring to الذي (the actual subject of the preceding clause).
= the sincerity of whose resolve has dented the edge of (the sword of) polytheism.
I’m not even sure if the syntax above is acceptable English or not, the more I read myself, the less I can tell.

 

[Pacifica]

I’m not even sure if the syntax above is acceptable English or not

It is.

Thanks.

 

[Pacifica]

وفتكت بعباد الصليب كتائبه

I would've thought عباد was عِباد, but the book vocalizes it as عُبَّاد. What's that?

 

[interprete]

وفتكت بعباد الصليب كتائبه

I would've thought عباد was عِباد, but the book vocalizes it as عُبَّاد. What's that?

It’s the plural of عابد (worshipper) as opposed to عبْد (servant or slave). Good thing they gave you the vocalization, I wouldn’t have thought twice and would have read it عٍباد as well.