New Revised Saudi Textbooks Still Teach Hate

[Wolfman]

Although I dislike to agree with sunni man, I would advise caution in this regard. One language may have many different words for different aspects of something, while another language has not exact parallels, and lumps them together as one word.

For example, in Amish communities, they sometimes talk about "hating outsiders" or "hating the outside world". In this regard, they don't mean "hate" as "despise"; rather, they mean it as "something to be avoided". Anyone who's actually visited an Amish community (as I have several times) will find that they are actually a very warm, generous people...despite the fact that if you went to one of their services, you'd hear them talking about "hate".

It may be that, technically, "hate" is a translation of the word(s) used in the original language; but it may also be that there are subtle connotations or meanings of that specific word that do not carry over into the English translation. If "hate the unbelievers" actually means something more like "avoid the unbelievers" or "stay separate from the unbelievers" or "don't listen to the unbelievers", then the translation as we're reading it is inaccurate.

And some clarifications here:

A) I'm not saying that the translation is wrong; I'm saying only that I'd like to see a more authoritative commentary on the actual meaning of the word(s) used in the original language, before I go jumping to conclusions

B) Even if the translation is inaccurate, and it isn't actively inciting to hatred, it still promotes intolerance, and for that reason would still be objectionable and cause for concern.

 

[gumboot]

Colour me surprised. Wahhabism is a particularly neighbourly strain of Islam. I for one look forward to the day that the west ceases to be reliant on Middle East oil so places like this can be left to rot.

(By "places like this" I mean places where the government actively encourages bigotry, sexism, and the extermination of anything that is different to the prevailing belief)

 

[Puppycow]

Although I dislike to agree with sunni man, I would advise caution in this regard. One language may have many different words for different aspects of something, while another language has not exact parallels, and lumps them together as one word.

For example, in Amish communities, they sometimes talk about "hating outsiders" or "hating the outside world". In this regard, they don't mean "hate" as "despise"; rather, they mean it as "something to be avoided". Anyone who's actually visited an Amish community (as I have several times) will find that they are actually a very warm, generous people...despite the fact that if you went to one of their services, you'd hear them talking about "hate".

It may be that, technically, "hate" is a translation of the word(s) used in the original language; but it may also be that there are subtle connotations or meanings of that specific word that do not carry over into the English translation. If "hate the unbelievers" actually means something more like "avoid the unbelievers" or "stay separate from the unbelievers" or "don't listen to the unbelievers", then the translation as we're reading it is inaccurate.

And some clarifications here:

A) I'm not saying that the translation is wrong; I'm saying only that I'd like to see a more authoritative commentary on the actual meaning of the word(s) used in the original language, before I go jumping to conclusions

B) Even if the translation is inaccurate, and it isn't actively inciting to hatred, it still promotes intolerance, and for that reason would still be objectionable and cause for concern.

The Amish are very peaceful. I've never heard of the Amish attacking anyone. There's no Amish version of Al Qaeda. They deserve the benefit of the doubt. Hardly a day goes by in Iraq that there isn't some sort of suicide bombing.

 

[gumboot]

Although I dislike to agree with sunni man, I would advise caution in this regard. One language may have many different words for different aspects of something, while another language has not exact parallels, and lumps them together as one word.

For example, in Amish communities, they sometimes talk about "hating outsiders" or "hating the outside world". In this regard, they don't mean "hate" as "despise"; rather, they mean it as "something to be avoided". Anyone who's actually visited an Amish community (as I have several times) will find that they are actually a very warm, generous people...despite the fact that if you went to one of their services, you'd hear them talking about "hate".

It may be that, technically, "hate" is a translation of the word(s) used in the original language; but it may also be that there are subtle connotations or meanings of that specific word that do not carry over into the English translation. If "hate the unbelievers" actually means something more like "avoid the unbelievers" or "stay separate from the unbelievers" or "don't listen to the unbelievers", then the translation as we're reading it is inaccurate.

And some clarifications here:

A) I'm not saying that the translation is wrong; I'm saying only that I'd like to see a more authoritative commentary on the actual meaning of the word(s) used in the original language, before I go jumping to conclusions

B) Even if the translation is inaccurate, and it isn't actively inciting to hatred, it still promotes intolerance, and for that reason would still be objectionable and cause for concern.

How about

"The last hour won't come before the Muslims would fight the Jews and the Muslims will kill them so Jews would hide behind rocks and trees. Then the rocks and tree would call: oh Muslim, oh servant of God! There is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only "Gharkad" tree, it is of Jews' trees."

Maybe the Arabic word for "kill" and "give a right old telling off" are the same as well...

Anyone seen the "Dispatches" episode Undercover Mosque about allegedly "moderate" mosques in the UK teaching wahhabism? It might clarify whether the general attitude of that particular sect is to "avoid" nonbelievers or to "hate" them.

 

[Wolfman]

How about

Maybe the Arabic word for "kill" and "give a right old telling off" are the same as well...

Anyone seen the "Dispatches" episode Undercover Mosque about allegedly "moderate" mosques in the UK teaching wahhabism? It might clarify whether the general attitude of that particular sect is to "avoid" nonbelievers or to "hate" them.

Sure...how about I take the word "gay" as used in an 18th century novel, and use it to interpret the exact meaning of the word "gay" in a 20th century novel? It makes about as much sense.

The question here is not whether or not Islam teaches hatred, or how to interpret specific passages in the Koran. The question here is whether a religious textbook from Saudi Arabia teaches active hatred; or whether the specific use of the word "hate" in the English translation may or may not render the exact meaning accurately.

Unless you can demonstrate that the word used in the textbook being referred to is exactly the same as the word used in the passage that you quoted (and I'm quite certain that you can't), your comment is entirely irrelevant.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

You think Iran's Shiites aren't every bit as backwards as the Sunnis in SA?

Actually, generally speaking they aren't.

In Iran it's perfectly acceptable (and commonplace) for a woman to drive, teach, do many things that in Saudi Arabia end up in her getting arrested and locked up, IF she's lucky.

In Iran there are still some forms of Westernisation allowed, and in fact Iran is one of the most liberal Islamic states in the world, if not THE most liberal. (Unless Turkey is counted, although that is a secular state).

Yes, Iran is still backwards, yes, they are still governed by an insane religion, but no, they are nowhere near as bad as Saudi Arabia, and I wish people would realise this without jumping head frist into the "Iran is one of the worst!!!!!!11!" pool of collective idiocy.

 

[Wolfman]

The Amish are very peaceful. I've never heard of the Amish attacking anyone. There's no Amish version of Al Qaeda. They deserve the benefit of the doubt. Hardly a day goes by in Iraq that there isn't some sort of suicide bombing.

And of course all the Muslims in Iraq are the same; and all the Muslims in Saudi Arabia are the same as all the Muslims in Iraq.

And of course, it is not at all possible that the word "hate" used here could possibly have any other meaning; or if it does, its irrelevant, since those damn Muslims are so darn violent anyway.

My god, this is a skeptic's forum, and just look at the arguments I'm getting! I point out simply that it is possible that the word "hate", as translated in English from a Saudi religious textbook, may have other connotations or meanings in the original text that are not accurately represented in the translation. What kind of responses do I get?

We're talking about a textbook in Saudi Arabia...and Puppycow starts spouting off about terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq. We're talking about a textbook in Saudi Arabia...and gumboot starts quoting from the Koran.

The actions of people in Iraq have absolutely no bearing on the translation of a specific word in a Saudi textbook. And a quotation from the Koran has absolutely no bearing on the meaning of a word in this textbook, unless it can be demonstrated that the same word was used in both texts in the original language.

Are there Muslims who teach hatred? Yes, there are. Are there Muslims who commit acts of hatred and violence? Yes, there are. I am not disputing these facts.

But -- does the English word "hate" as used in this translation accurately convey the full context and meaning of the word(s) used in the original language? I don't know. Neither, I suspect, does anyone else here.

And is it possible for a word with a particular meaning to be inaccurately or incompletely translated into another language? Heck, not only is it possible, it is quite likely; every language has words and concepts that cannot be exactly translated into other languages, or that require extended explanations in order to understand the actual context and meaning.

Yeah, its possible that the text in question does teach hatred, and that the translation is accurate. Its also possible that its not. Nobody here has presented any evidence that would allow a conclusion one way or the other.

And let me point out -- people like Puppycow and gumboot are, in my opinion, guilty of doing much the same thing they accuse the Muslims of. Instead of simply admitting that it is impossible to reach a conclusion about the validity of the translation, they instead trot out other entirely unconnected examples in order to foster fear and hatred.

"Look at how many people those evil Muslims in Iraq killed! And look at what this passage in the Koran says! Therefore, the Saudis must be teaching hatred in this textbook!"

 

[Nationalcosmopolitan]

Tanah – Holy Book
New Testament – Holy Book
Koran – Holy Book
Tripitaha – Holy Book.

Let us read those Holy Books regularly, every year one from those Holy Books for all our lifelong.
Let us be one year Jews, one year – Muslims, one year – Christians, one year – Buddhists for all our life.
Let us agree that Moshe, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad are equally greatest prophets.

 

[pchams]

Tanah – Holy Book
New Testament – Holy Book
Koran – Holy Book
Tripitaha – Holy Book.

Let us read those Holy Books regularly, every year one from those Holy Books for all our lifelong.
Let us be one year Jews, one year – Muslims, one year – Christians, one year – Buddhists for all our life.
Let us agree that Moshe, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad are equally greatest prophets.

Or let's not, and think for ourselves.
Here is another good read for you, and just as true as the above fictional stories:
http://aesopfables.com/

 

[Bikewer]

I'm with Wolfman on this, as I indicated in my original post. I know nothing of Arabic, save that it is often described as a "flowery" language full of nuance; and thus rather difficult for Westerners.
I too would like to see an authoritative reading of this particular text to see what is actually implied.
It may well simply mean "hate", but it may not...

 

[Mycroft]

I have seen this type of misinformation before, The questions and answers have been mistranslated by Islamophobes to spread lies and hate towards muslims.

It seems unlikely that the government of Saudi Arabia, which presumably has access to a near limitless number of people who read and write Arabic, would deliberately mistranslate a book for the purpose of smearing Islam.

 

[fuelair]

But this is after American diplomats complained and they promised to do a thorough review.

Yes, and at the risk of repeating myself..............................

 

[Beerina]

If God actually exists, I am unfaithful and ungrateful. God is a horrific thug for allowing babies to be raped to death.

End of freakin' discussion.

 

[drkitten]

Let us read those Holy Books regularly, every year one from those Holy Books for all our lifelong.

Even better -- let's read something worthwhile and informative that will improve our lives.

Let us be one year Jews, one year – Muslims, one year – Christians, one year – Buddhists for all our life.

Even better -- let's be humanists and work for the betterment of all mankind instead of only those with whom we agree.

Let us agree that Moshe, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad are equally greatest prophets.

Actually, this may be the only statement that NC has ever made with which I can agree. But only because none of the men listed were actually prophets -- and at least two of them never existed in the first place.

Even better -- let's agree that Moshe, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad, the Easter Bunny, Mr. Spock, Harry Potter, and Gandalf are equally greatest prophets!

 

[drkitten]

It seems unlikely that the government of Saudi Arabia, which presumably has access to a near limitless number of people who read and write Arabic, would deliberately mistranslate a book for the purpose of smearing Islam.

It seems equally unlikely that the Saudi government are the ones responsible for this particular translation.

 

[moon1969]

Saudis are major players. Plus Bush and the House of Saud are good friends but I bet they still laugh at Bush behind his back.

 

[fuelair]

Saudis are major players. Plus Bush and the House of Saud are good friends but I bet they still laugh at Bush behind his back.

Well, let's just say I am fairly certain they do something "behind his back" and may well laugh or ululate as they do it.

 

[fuelair]

If God actually exists, I am unfaithful and ungrateful. God is a horrific thug for allowing babies to be raped to death.

End of freakin' discussion.

That's why I like to say (quite truthfully) that if It was shown to really exist, I would have to hunt it down and try to kill it.

 

[Texas]

Not surprising. And my general impression is that most Muslims outside the Kingdom despise the Saudis and their brand of Sunni Islam that is still stuck in the 11th century (I've personally been told this by people from Muslim countries as different as Iran, Qatar, and Indonesia).

Yet Bush and Abdullah are buds, so it's all good.

LOL Indonesia and Qatar are Sunni Muslim in fact the House of Saud came from Qatar. Here is a great idea, move Mecca and Medina to another "moderate" Islamic state and see how long the "moderates" are allowed to stay in power. You have no idea the tightrope the Saudi royals have to walk with those two sites within their borders.

 

[Tumblehome]

Those who reject our Signs, We shall soon cast into the Fire: as often as their skins are roasted through, We shall change them for fresh skins, that they may taste the penalty: for Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise. (4:56)

Allah will roast you alive again and again and again but don't worry, he doesn't hate you. Feel his love, people!