Talk:Abdullah Yusuf Ali

significance

I added the cleanup-importance tag because I cannot see from this article alone why the man might be noteworthy. The article in its current state only tells me this man was a published expert on the Quran. There must be thousands of published experts on the Quran, most of which probably have some opinions about politics in South Asia. Somebody loves him enough to put him on wikipedia - but why? --81.154.236.221 00:38, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

I think that the importance of his translation of the Qur'an into English is the reason for inclusion -- if so then this information needs to be in the first (not the last) paragraph. Andreww 00:44, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

His Text, Translation, and Commentary of the Qur'an is probably the most widely used in my experience. I would put it down on par with the King James Bible. It is still edited and republished by dozens of large printing houses all over the world. The man's influence on the religious discourse is inestimable. The diction, opinions, commentary, and historical and mystical notes included in his original work are today the subject of an intellectual tug of war manifested in how his work is represented today in current printings. Abdullah Yusuf Ali is about as noteworthy as any literary or religious scholar in the world could possibly be. The day he isn't considered to be so is the day that one side has won that tug of war.WMHS 02:26, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

WMHS is exactly right. An odd note is that it seems difficult to find Ali's translation of the Qur'an in your average American book store. I own two copies: one is a badly done version published in India that I found in a used book store and the other is a very beautiful version that was published in Lebanon and which I bought through international mail. Barnes & Noble simply doesn't carry Ali's translation and they ought to. My impression is that Ali has his fans but that those who favor all of his original interpretations are in the minority. Ali may have been more open to representing different opinions within Islam which he allowed to speak through his commentary. He also seems to have promoted a rapprochement with some aspects of liberalism (such as it existed more than a century ago) which he did not see as an abandonment of Islam but rather as justified by a careful reading of the Qur'an.

criticism

Surat Al-Kahf, 18:90 Until, when he reached (a tract) between two mountains, he found, beneath them, a people who scarcely understood a word. It is not what I read in the Quran. It is written that: Till, when he reached the rising-place of the sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We had appointed no shelter therefrom (Pickthall). Whoever has knowledge about this explain it.

There is no mountain mentioned in the verse. It is mentioned later on the other people. This is a serious matter. Alromaithi 00:46, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

To the ear of a native English speaker, as can be seen from the compared quotations above, Pickthall's English is distractingly awkward. Ali's text reads better; however, a lack of literalness in Ali's translation could, indeed, be misleading. Would this be a place to explain why his translation of the above passage is "a serious matter" beyond the physical description and the order in which he reveals it? Does the difference have theological significance? And what about the first Surah where Pickthall refers to the "Owner of the Day of Judgment" whereas Ali has "Master of the Day of Judgment"? I prefer Ali's choice because it sounds much better in English. I am reminded, however, that I have compared many passages in the Greek text of the Christian Testament to about eight different English translations, and none of them renders the Greek quite right. Not sure theologians would say the differences make any difference. This is not a problem limited to translations of the Qur'an. - Unknown poster (please remember to put your signature and date stamp!)

Regarding Alromaithi's criticism, this is what 18:90 says in my copy of the Yusuf Ali translation, which is a copy from 1938. "Until, when he came /To the rising of the sun, /He found it rising /On a people for whom /We had provided /No covering protection / Against the sun." Then 18:93 reads, as Al-Romaithi describes "Until, when he reached/(A tract) between two mountains, /He found, beneath them, a people /Who scarcely understood a word."

Consequently I think that either whoever printed the versions being described above must have either changed Ali's numbering to be different from Pickthall's, or there is a mistake in what was quoted at the top of this section. In general, though, I agree with the previous post that this is not a significant issue, so long as the Arabic text provided is identical.

--WMHS (talk) 07:02, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Qur'ān 3:45: "Behold! the angels said: "O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, held in honour in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah." - Yusuf Ali translation

I personally find the translation here annoying. Since Abdullah Yusuf Ali died in 1953 there was no reason for him to translate the Qur'an into English with the language of King James -- except to make it "sound" more scriptural. This was the same annoying nonsense employed by the Mormon founder Joseph Smith. Danwaggoner (talk) 05:47, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Native language

I think It would be of great interest if someone knows the native language of Abdullah Yusuf Ali, to include it in the article. --Camahuetos 13:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Date of death

I found the date of death is about 1948 M, 1367 H in Lahore from a pretext of a Quran translation book, but the date in this article is different.--60.52.22.163 20:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Further details

Abdullah Yusuf Ali died on 10th December 1953 in London. For details see his biography 'Searching for Solace' by M A Sherif http://www.salaam.co.uk/bazaar/solace.php

Preface to First Edition, 1934

Can this please be added to wikiquote?

Austerlitz -- 88.72.18.125 17:36, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Photo

It's very beautiful to have a photo. Thank you.

Austerlitz -- 88.75.72.6 (talk) 10:15, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Sunni or Shi'i?

So in my recent edit I added that he is a Shi'i as this is what I read in the main section of the article, but conversly now I have another source saying he is a Sunni(?)

Of the Sunni translators, only Yusuf Ali and the Zidans retain the Arabic word in this way.

— Robinson, Neal. "Sectarian and ideological bias in Muslim translations of the Qur'an." Islam and Christian‐Muslim Relations 8.3 (1997): 261-278.

Faizhaider, Vice regent, LissanX, TheEagle107, GorgeCustersSabre, what do you think?

How many sources are there that lists him as an Shi'i vs Sunni? Which of them should be included in the infobox? Should we include that his denomination is disputed or keep it as Shi'i or what? ParthikS8 (talk) 22:41, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@ParthikS8: Based on the fact that ADILP (which is a Shia effort) mentions him as Sunni and that The Presidency of Islamic Researches, Saudi Arabia, has published Yusuf Ali translation, (which IMHO will never publish/endorse a Shia translation). I think he may be have born in a Ismaili family, but he definitely was Sunni.--Fz^tc_s 09:40, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

@Faizhaider:Interesting, with the current sources I tend to agree - it seems the statement that he is a Dawoodi Bohra is incorrect then and not in the provided source.

So the Oxford source states that his father was a Bohra, whilst other sources state that he himself was a Sunni. Intruigingly in his Qur'anic commentary he refers to Hazrat Abu Bakr - something that I do not think any Isma'ili Shi'i would do. At the same time I would prefer if there was some kind of source that explicitly states all this, "His father was a Dawoodi Bohra but he became a Sunni".

Right now (if this is what the sources say and other editors aren't aware of anything to the contrary), we could change references to his own religion to Sunni, but this would have to go unexplained in the article as to why his father was a Bohra amd yet his son became a Sunni - we could not state anything meaningful without performing synthesis. The issue here is that an editor in the future may get confused as to why his father was, verifiably, a Bohra and so may decide to change the denomination back. A third source I think would really help here. ParthikS8 (talk) 05:22, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

ParthikS8, My information about him before reading your message was that he was an Indian Shiite translator of the Qur’an and that Sheikh Ahmad Deedat used his translation of the Qur’an and was recommended it (in his time). But now, after doing a quick search about him, I found that his family was Shiite, and converted to Sunni Islam (Source in Arabic).

The source says:

In Bombay, India, and to a Shiite family that has converted to the Sunni creed/faith, Abdullah Yusuf Ali was born on April 14, 1872 CE...

Here is another source in English that confirms that he was Sunni: A Shi'ite Encyclopedia. A vast collection of information that addresses Shi'a/Sunni inter-school related issues. An effort of the Ahlul Bayt Digital Islamic Library Project Team.

I also found that there are those who say that he was a Shiite translator: Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies.--TheEagle107 (talk) 07:13, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

@TheEagle107: So it seems the majority are saying that he is a Sunni/his family converted to Sunnism, but others are stating his father was a Dawoodi Bohra and that he too is a Shi'i. Not that we should be doing primary source analysis, but I can't help but notice in all of this how his commentary on the Qur'an contains Sunni views. Now unless we say he was a Zaydi as an explanation for e.g. the Routledge source stating he is a Shi'i translator - which no source to my knowledge states - this works with the sources above that state he is a Sunni.

I think I would agree with both editors then that he was a Sunni based off of the majority of sources even from different points of view. Still, I feel this is up for further discussion in the future, especially if other sources are found - with one or two more stating he is a Shi'i I would personally argue for putting his denomination as disputed. But for now I will edit the article to state he is a Sunni based off of the majority of reliable sources.

Happy editing, ParthikS8 (talk) 15:22, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

ParthikS8, According to the majority of sources, and especially the Arabic source mentioned above, I agree and support that his family was Shiite and converted to the Sunni faith, and based on that, he was born Sunni and was never Shiite!--TheEagle107 (talk) 19:20, 23 April 2021 (UTC)