Review of The Qur’an – a New Translation by M.A.S. Abdel Haleem

292555111_26a1463b4d_oTranslation is no easy task, especially when dealing with the words of Allah, the All-Mighty. Many attempts have been made to translate the Qur’an’s meaning into English, starting with Alexander Ross and George Sale in the 16th and 17th centuries.1 Some endeavors, especially 19th and 20th century ones (i.e. by Rodwell, Bell and Dawood) have done more harm than good by distorting the Qur’an’s meanings, or even the divine sequence of its chapters. Other attempts, such as Pickthall’s, Yusuf Ali’s and even Arthur Arberry’s, try sincerely to convey the intended meanings of the Qur’an. However, even the latter also fall short in some areas, such as the use of archaic language, overbearing commentary or lack of historical contextualization.

One of the more recent twenty-first century attempts to transcend past translations’ shortcomings in clarity, accuracy, and modernity of language comes from M.A.S Abdel Haleem. Abdel Haleem is a Muslim Professor of Islamic Studies at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London, England, and is also the editor of the Journal of Qur’anic Studies. He was born in Egypt, and is a hāfidh who memorized the Qur’an during his childhood. He received a B.A. in Arabic and Islamic Studies from Cairo University and his Ph.D. from the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom.

Abdel Haleem’s seven-year translation project, The Qur’an, was first published in 2004 by Oxford University Press, with a new edition published in 2005. His introduction to the translation, as well as the translation itself, both reveal that his efforts are aimed at doing faithful justice to the original Arabic, while acknowledging the difficulties of translating the meanings of a sacred text revealed and preserved in the Arabic language. He identifies his goal as “mak[ing] the Qur’an accessible to everyone who speaks English, Muslims or otherwise, including the millions of people all over the world for whom the English language has become a lingua franca.”

Contents and Methodology

Prefacing the actual translation, Abdel Haleem includes an introduction that covers numerous topics, such as the life of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, the spread of Islam, as well as the revelation, compilation, structure and stylistic features of the Qur’an. In addition, he provides an overview of some significant English translations, followed by a brief explanation of his methodology and reasons for embarking on a new translation. He also includes a chronological list of major events in early Islamic history that are relevant to the contents of the Qur’an, the compilation of the Qur’an, and the release of significant translations spanning from Ross’s first translation (1649) to Muhammad Asad’s (1980). Although the introduction resembles an introductory text on Islam and the Qur’an, it helps provide a foundation for the reader to better appreciate the Qur’an’s structure, language and meanings.

One of the important issues Abdel Haleem addresses in the introduction is the order of the verses and topics within the chapters—which even many Muslims find difficult to understand. He states: “The reader should not expect the Qur’an to be arranged chronologically or by subject matter. The Qur’an may present, in the same sura, material about the unity and grace of God, regulations and laws, stories of earlier prophets and nations and the lessons that can be drawn from these, and the descriptions of rewards and punishments on the Day of Judgment.” Using examples such as how prayer reminders appear in the midst of divorce and settlements verses, and how ayat al-kursi (2:255) appears in the midst of charity verses, he notes: “This technique compresses many aspects of the Qur’anic message into any one sura, each forming self-contained lessons. This is particularly useful as it is rare for anyone to read the whole Qur’an at once…”

Clarifications such as these help dispel the suspicions and confusion readers may face when trying to make sense of the structure of the Qur’an. Although Abdel Haleem’s simple explanation does not delve into the thematic and structural coherence of the Qur’an’s verses and chapters (which many Muslim scholars and exegetes have detailed beautifully), it suffices for a novice reader of the Qur’an (Muslim or non-Muslim), or a beginner student learning about Islam and its sacred texts.

Language and References

The language used in this translation is probably one of Abdel Haleem’s greatest accomplishments. Other older translations have used Shakespearean language or direct and literal translations that trap the text in confusing and complicated diction, which hinders the readers from understanding and connecting with Allah’s words. Abdel Haleem, however, uses clear and simplified modern English that makes the text reader-friendly and very easy to follow. He states in his introduction: “The message of the Qur’an was, after all, directly addressed to all people without distinction as to class, gender, or age: it does not rely on archaisms or pompous language for effect. Although the language of the present translation is simple and straightforward, it is hoped that it does not descend to an inappropriate level.”2

Abdel Haleem also shies away from literal translations that make idioms and certain phrases sound awkward in English. His chosen methodology is to provide the rendered meaning in English, often with a footnote of the literal translation. An example is his translation of ‘umm al-qura’ (42:7) as ‘capital city,’ with a footnote stating: “Literally, ‘the mother of cities,’ Mecca.”

One notable, linguistic feature of Abdel Haleem’s translation is its consideration for shifts in pronouns that occur sometimes within one verse. These shifts do not translate into English, so his method for clarifying them is to insert bracketed notes of who is being addressed (i.e. the Prophet, all people, etc.). This can be seen in his translation of ayah 10:61: “In whatever matter you [Prophet] may be engaged and whatever part of the Qur’an you are reciting, whatever work you [people] are doing, We witness you when you are engaged in it.”

In addition to his use of modern language and attention to linguistic nuances, Abdel Haleem keeps his translation deeply rooted in the original Arabic meanings and classical exegesis. He cites well-known Arabic dictionaries and classical Arabic works to clarify meanings and explain linguistic differences and idioms. Some of the works and commentaries he relied on are Abu Hayyan’s al-Bahr al-Muhīt, al-Zamakshari’s al-Kashāf and Asās Al-Balāgha, al-Baydawi’s Anwār al-Tanzīl wa Asrār al-Ta’wīl, Qutb’s Fi Dhilāl al-Qur’ān, and one of his most frequently referenced sources, al-Razi’s al-Tafsīr al-Kabīr.

Structure and Punctuation

Abdel Haleem chose an unprecedented way to display his translation. He combines the verses into flowing script (versus placing each verse on a line), and breaks up the text into paragraphs based on shift in topic. His reason for doing so is to “clarify the meaning and structure of thoughts and to meet the expectation of modern readers.” He also numbers the verses using superscripts at the start of each verse and letters his footnotes (also in superscript). This overall format and superscripting provides easier flow in reading and also helps readers find or cite verses more easily. The translation occupies the majority of each page (except for smaller chapters) and footnotes rarely take up more than the lower sixth of the page, which keeps the readers focused on the main text rather than being distracted by detailed and overwhelming commentary.

Another feature of Abdel Haleem’s translation is the addition of punctuation. Although the Qur’an has its own system of marking pauses and continuation in recitation (`ilm al-waqf wa’l-ibtida’), the Qur’an does not have punctuation marks that delineate parenthetical statements, quotations, exclamatory remarks, etc.—which are unnecessary and implied by context (for the most part) for those well-versed in the Arabic language. As one of many efforts to provide clarity to the Qur’an’s meanings, Abdel Haleem has introduced punctuation marks, such as commas, semicolons, dashes, exclamation marks, quotation marks, etc. For example, ayahs 36-37 of Surat Aāli `Imrān read:

‘Imran’s wife said, ‘Lord, I have dedicated what is growing in my womb entirely to You; so accept this from me. You are the One who hears and knows all,’ but when she gave birth, she said, ‘My Lord! I have given birth to a girl’—God knew best what she had given birth to: the male is not like the female—‘I name her Mary and I commend her and her offspring to Your protection from the rejected Satan.’

This punctuation certainly helps readers differentiate between narrative and quotations; however, inserting punctuation without footnoting alternative readings (qirā’āt) or pauses may make the punctuation appear definitive, when in fact it is not. For example, the parenthetical statement above may not include “the male is not like the female,” which would make it a continuation of `Imran’s wife’s statement. Also, the Arabic phrase for ‘she gave birth’ (wada`at) can be read as ‘wada`tu’ (I gave birth) in a different reading. If this part of the verse is read using the second reading (“And Allah knows well what I gave birth to”), it would make this statement a continuation of `Imran’s wife’s statement as well.3

Despite his translation’s minor shortcomings, Abdel Haleem has produced what may be considered one of the most genuine and refreshing translations in contemporary times. His most notable success is merging authenticity with originality and transmitting Qur’anic meanings from classical Islamic works in an easily accessible language for both the Muslim and non-Muslim English-speaking populace.  May Allah reward him and bless him for his efforts.

Note: this review is only an attempt to expose readers to a relatively new translation that may be unknown to some. Readers may prefer reading other translations that supersede this translation in both language and preservation of the original Qur’anic meanings.

  1. See Tafsir Al-Jalalayn. www.quran.com/3
  2. Some scholars find that the translation is too simplified in some areas, and includes imprecise translations of certain words and phrases. It also omits many Arabic conjunctions  (i.e. “wa” (and), “fa” (then)), which detracts from nuanced meanings regarding chronology of events conveyed in the Qur’an.
  3. Abdel Haleem, M.A.S. The Qur’an: A New Translation. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. p. xxvii.

About the author

Naiyerah Kolkailah

Naiyerah Kolkailah

Naiyerah Kolkailah was born and raised in San Luis Obispo, California. She graduated from Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo, with a B.S. in Biological Sciences, and a minor in Religious Studies. During her college years, she served as President of the Muslim Students’ Association (MSA) and Vice President of the statewide organization, MSA-West. In 2011, Naiyerah received a Diploma in Islamic Studies from the Faculty of Islamic Studies at Qatar Foundation in Doha, Qatar. In 2012, she received a license in memorization and recitation of the Qur’an from Shaykh Uthman Khan, whom she continues to study Tajweed with at Jaamiah Jazriyyah. Naiyerah currently lives in Pismo Beach, California, where she co-directs an Islamic Studies youth program, private tutors women and children in Qur’anic recitation and memorization, and speaks about Islam at local churches, interfaith events and Islam classes. She is also serving as President of the Board of Directors of the Islamic Society of San Luis Obispo County. Naiyerah can be reached at naiyerah@gmail.com.


  • I really love AbdelHaleem’s translation. My friend who accepted Islam found it very difficult to find an accessible translation of the Qur’an- but AbdelHaleem’s translation was soo helpful mashAllah.

  • Jazak Allahu khairan for this review. It looks like an interesting translation, and one that I hope read in the future.

    There are a few problems I see in most of the translations I’ve come across so far (I’m not talking about this one, since I haven’t read it):
    1. Many translations are written by people who did not master the Arabic language, particularly in the areas of advanced grammar and rhetoric.
    2. Most translations have been written by people with limited or no training in the science of Tafseer. A translation is a tafseer to some extent, because the translator has to make a lot of choices when conveying the meaning of verses in a concise manner in a different language. This really should be done by someone who combines linguistic training with a solid background in tafseer, rather than someone who just knows the language and then picks whatever meaning found in a dictionary.
    3. Some translations are done by individuals or grouops who have a particular agenda. For example, I read an article about a lady who was writing a translation, and came across a verse that unsettled her. She looked at many dictionaries and finally came across an obscure translation of a word in the verse, which she chose since it made the translation of a verse fit her view point.

    There is also the issue that translations do not take into account the different recitations, but that is probably necessary in order to keep things concise and to avoid confusion.

    • Excellent points OK, jazakAllahu khayran.

      Another point is that readers might not even realize the inaccuracy in these translations when they don’t know that the authors aren’t genuine, or well-versed in Arabic; or didn’t study `ulum al-qur’an, tafsir, and dawabit al-ta’wil; or aren’t even recognized as respected scholars or exegetes by the `ulama of our Ummah so they can have the license to convey the Qur’an’s meaning to the masses.

      I’d be interested to see in-depth critiques from Muslim scholars for this translation because its genuineness and exceptional language are what struck me; and just from a cursory read about the author and his goals, he seems relatively qualified to have taken on this project (at least compared to other past [mis]translators). The translation isn’t perfect (as no human work ever is), and there are some interesting/imprecise translations and interpretations. But with respect to the overall meanings, they appear to be rooted in classical exegeses as he references and cites many of them frequently. As for whether or not he chose the most accurate interpretations from these exegetical works, that’s for the scholars to comment on.

  • Thank you for this indepth review, Naiyerah. I have been looking for a good English translation of the Qur’an. In reference to the archaic language that is used in some of the translations, that really gets in the way of A. fully understanding the text and B. being able to enjoy the reading process.

    I will be sharing your article with family and friends.

  • More disturbingly, Abdel-Haleem deliberately misconstrues verses he finds distasteful, e.g. the command to amputate the hands of thieves.

    • Verse 5:38 in MAS A-H’s translation says “Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are man or woman, as punishment for what they have done–a deterrent from God: God is almighty and wise.” Doesn’t seem like anything’s misconstrued, unless I missed something.

      • Dear ‘Seeker’; the problem is with the interpretive gloss he puts on the ayah, rather than the translation itself- which, if he was guilty of it, would make him like the Jews who sold Allah’s verses for a paltry price.

        It was actually a student from Makkah who told me this. He said that Abdel-Haleem’s translation was the best in the English language, stylistically, only the guy was ‘an extreme modernist heretic’.

        • Why do you assume that the translation you’ve been reading is the correct one? The word in the verse fopr hands could just as easily have been support, making the verse read, cut off his support.

        • No you are wrong, it could never be as you say, the contextual evidence is too clear that it means hand as in part of the body. Also the Asl (Orginal/Source) meaning for the word Yad in arabic is Hand, in the literal sense, there is times when it can mean support, grace favor and etc, but that is when there is clear cut linguistic and context proof, and not rational proof, please note the difference between the two. Also the meanings other than Hand conveyed by this Word Yad are furooa3 (Secondary) meanings and to take a word from its primary to it secondary meaning you once again need linguistic and contextual proof. Also the meanings other then Hand for Yad, are also used in the metaphorical sense, so if you say that it means support then you have made the word metaphoric, and metaphors in reality have no standardized rules and the individual can then distort the meaning of a word, compound or sentence if he so wills. So once again as the claimant it is upon you to bring the linguistic proof. Furthermore, it is clear cut when you look at the classical Commentaries of the Qur’aan, The Books Divine Law, the Narrations of the Prophet SAW and his companions, the understanding of the Scholars who uphold the Pure teachings of Islam, the implementation of this law throughout Islamic Rule, that it does not mean what you say Oh Abdu, so please refrain from speaking about things you have know knowledge of and spreading false information and misconceptions. The true Muslims will never let anyone even attempt to distort a single word of the Quran, or even a diacritical marking therein. May Allah guide us and give us Beneficial knowledge.

  • For those of you checking for a copy of this book, please be aware that there are several editions. The older edition (2005?) is about 300 pages, whereas the one from 2008 is around 500 pages.

  • Masha’Allah, simply the best translation of the Qur’aan into contemporary English. Both the word usage and punctuation makes it so easy to read.

  • I find it interesting nobody has brought up the newest copy (and IMO the best) english translation by Tarif Khalidi.

    • I recently heard about it, but haven’t looked through a copy yet. From what I understand, it doesn’t have footnoted commentary with linguistic definitions or historical contextualization as with MAS Abdel Haleem’s.

      Anything in particular that’s unique to Khalidi’s translation?

  • In reading this translation I find that indeed he has done something great and unique with keeping the translation true to the English, but I did find many places where he was obviously influenced by the orientalists and often catering to thier objections while neglecting to represent the meaning of the fanous tafseer’s.

    • Thanks for this link!

      While Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s language is a little harder to digest at first, the entire practice of reading it will not only help in understanding the Quran, but also improve one’s English. I think it is important to read the Quran in a language different than reading a common news article. It’s good that Abdel haleem tried to meet the needs of the modern English speaker but it does not covey to me the “authority” that the Y. Ali style does. But the most important thing is making sure the Arabic translation is the most correct.

      As for the comment above about the “lady” translator picking a translation that suits her view is really an insult towards the people who are sincere seekers of knowledge. First of all, she was not the first person to put forward this alternative definition of darrabah, but additionally she has written a clear argument how the definition that darrabah does not mean “beat” but rather to “leave” is much closer to the Sunnah of the Prophet, who never hit his wives or servants, but when he was angry with them, he left his home for months while considering to divorce them. He also left Aisha when he was unsure if she was guilty of indecent behavior until Allah sent the Ayat clearing her of wrongdoing. When a verse such as this is translated as “beat”, then we have the injustice of domestic violence happening against a half of humanity. This doesn’t seem to concern our brothers at all, because it fits their views. Yet when a “lady” who is also a scholar of Quran and Arabic, who clearly shows that this word is misunderstood and against the Sunnah, she is accused of misrepresenting the Arabic language.

      Alhamdullilah that we still have the original Arabic to all go back to since if we were left with only the translations, then the Quran would be manipulated like the Bible.

  • M.A.S. Abdel haleem’s translation is head and shoulders above the rest of quran translations in english i have read.

  • Assalaamu 3alaykum

    how does his translation fare with Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan and Dr. Muhammad Taqi ud-Deen al-hilali in your opinions? (an open question to all who know)

    I haven’t heard of M.A.S. Abdel Haleem’s translation till this article and I just wanted to know as the Dr. Muhsin Khan’s translation, personally I love it as it straight forward and easy to understand as well as the footnotes giving depth by adding some a7aadeeth to it.

    • I mean no disrespect to the commentator above or Dr. Muhsin Khan’s efforts since I am sure he was sincere, but I have to say Dr. Khan’s translation is probably the worse translation of the Quran out there. You cannot include “hadiths” as a translation of the Quran. For example, when he translated Surah Fatiha, he writes “those who earn your wrath” (the jews) and “those who have gone astray” (the christians). No where does it say the “the Jews” nor the “the Christians” in the original Arabic. For those who do not know Arabic, they would be confused to think it does.

      There is a science of hadiths and we know there are weak and strong hadiths. He is the first person to elevate hadiths to the same accuracy and degree of authority as the Quran. This is completely wrong and will lead to a very inaccurate understanding of the Quran. For example the verses of Surah Fatiha apply equally to Muslims who have earned Allah’s wrath or who have gone astray. So by including the “paranthesis”, Muslims will not expand their understanding of the verses to look at themselves. The Quran is a message first and for most to those who read it and believe in it, –the Muslims. Thus every verse in there and any warning in it should first be understood to guide the lives of those who read it. It’s a book of self reflection and self-correction. The reader should work on themselves so that they don’t become like the unguided.

      Also , unfortunately Dr. Khan’s translation is written in very poor English with parenthesis inserted every other verse which makes the reading very difficulty. He translates Arabic words with Arabic words because he can’t find equivalent English words. Worse of all, like mentioned before, it inserts very weak hadiths into the actual translation of the Quran, rather than placing it as a commentary, which in my opinion, is changing the words of Allah and a huge sin.

      • Assalamualaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh

        Where did you get it that he places hadith on the same level on the Quran or that he uses weak hadith? Muslims follow the Quran AND the hadith, not just the Quran. It’s impossible to interpret the Quran without hadith.

        “For example the verses of Surah Fatiha apply equally to Muslims who have earned Allah’s wrath or who have gone astray. ”

        He is correct, and the one who by the permission of Allah brought you these ayat confirms his opinion.

        Imam Ahmad recorded that `Adi bin Hatim said, “The horsemen of the Messenger of Allah seized my paternal aunt and some other people. When they brought them to the Messenger of Allah , they were made to stand in line before him. My aunt said, `O Messenger of Allah! The supporter is far away, the offspring have stopped coming and I am an old woman, unable to serve. Grant me your favor, may Allah grant you His favor.’ He said, `Who is your supporter’ She said, `Adi bin Hatim.’ He said, `The one who ran away from Allah and His Messenger’ She said, `So, the Prophet freed me.’ When the Prophet came back, there was a man next to him, I think that he was `Ali, who said to her, `Ask him for a means of transportation.’ She asked the Prophet , and he ordered that she be given an animal.

        ” `Adi then said, “Later on, she came to me and said, `He (Muhammad ) has done a favor that your father (who was a generous man) would never have done. So and-so person came to him and he granted him his favor, and so-and-so came to him and he granted him his favor.’ So I went to the Prophet and found that some women and children were gathering with him, so close that I knew that he was not a king like Kisra (King of Persia) or Caesar. He said, `O `Adi! What made you run away, so that La ilaha illallah is not proclaimed Is there a deity worthy of worship except Allah What made you run away, so that Allahu Akbar (Allah is the Greater) is not proclaimed Is there anything Greater than Allah’ I proclaimed my Islam and I saw his face radiate with pleasure and he said:

        «إِنَّ الْمَغْضُوبَ عَلَيْهِمُ الْيَهُودُ وَ إِنَّ الضَّالِينَ النَّصَارَى»

        (Those who have earned the anger are the Jews and those who are led astray are the Christians.)”

        This Hadith was also collected by At-Tirmidhi who said that it is Hasan Gharib.

        “For example the verses of Surah Fatiha apply equally to Muslims who have earned Allah’s wrath or who have gone astray. So by including the “paranthesis”, Muslims will not expand their understanding of the verses to look at themselves.”

        Rather, it is by learning who these ayat refer to that we can apply it to ourselves. Most definitely Muslims have fallen from Islam into “maghdoobi alayhim” and “adaaaleen.”

        However, by knowing that these ayat refer the Jews and Christians, we take a lesson for ourselves. That’s because Allah says,

        “Allah’s Messenger (sal Allahu alaihi wa sallam) said: ‘You will indeed follow the ways of those before you, hand span by hand span, and an arms length after another. Even if they enter into a lizard’s hole, you will follow them.’ We (the Sahaba) asked, ‘Is it the Jews and the Christians?’ He replied, ‘Who else!’” [Bukhari]

        This is why Muslims cannot rely on translations alone as they may become misguided! We need tafsir, like Tafsir ibn Kathir from qtafsir.com and Nouman Ali Khan.

        In reality, Muhsin Khan’s translation is one of the very best of translations.

  • Not sure about Hilali’s but Khan’s language is less contemporary than MAS AH’s. Khan also uses too many parentheses (similar to “The Noble Qur’an”) or leaves lots of words in Arabic then explains them in parentheses. So the reading isn’t as smooth. MAS AH keeps all needed commentary and explanations in the footnotes.

    Compare translations of verse 4:3:

    Khan: And it is He Who spread out the earth, and placed therein firm mountains and rivers and of every kind of fruits He made Zawjain Ithnain (two in pairs – may mean two kinds or it may mean: of two sorts, e.g. black and white, sweet and sour, small and big, etc.) He brings the night as a cover over the day. Verily, in these things, there are Ayat (proofs, evidences, lessons, signs, etc.) for people who reflect.

    MAS A-H: It is He who spread out the earth, placed firm mountains and rivers on it, and made two of every kind of fruit; He draws the veil of night over the day. There truly are signs in this for people who reflect.

  • Assalamu alaikum, thanks for the http://www.al-quran.info link, Even if Abdel Haleem is supposedly a “modernist heretic” (whatever that means), this translation is the best I’ve seen myself, the reading is easy, and I’ve actually been able to sit and read the Qura’n and be able to understand what I’m reading, and not get a headache while trying to do it. I, personally, don’t want something to be so hard and archaic that I spend more time trying to decipher what I’m reading, than using what I’m reading to put into practice in my life, and to learn and benefit from it.

    As far as the verses on stoning, how does he treat these verses in the footnotes? The commentor who criticized this translation never really went into why he disliked it, other than to say something about Abdel Haleem being a “modernist” etc. Well, even if this translation, like all others, IMHO, has its flaws and defects, if it makes me want to read the Qur’an, and to read it for longer than 5 minutes, then IMHO, Haleem’s goal has been achieved.

  • Respected Incharge,
    Assalamu Aalikum ,
    I am Humaira Nazeer from Muslim family and I have completed my all Islamic study from IslamicInstitution of Toba Tek Singh . Today I have visited your website.Its realy wonderful work.I have desire to become the part of your Organization . I am able to do translation work.If you have translation work this is my request kindly contact with me. I am able to do Translation and recording work in some Pakistani Languages.
    Our National Language is Urdu and some other Provinces Languages. I do Islamic Translation work in Low and proper rates in Urdu, Punjabi , Sindhi ,Saraikie ,Arabic to Urdu and English to urdu.I am also able to do Recording work.
    I see on your site that you have working on different Languages in different countries.
    Hopefuly you will Contact with me soon.
    Humaira Nazeer
    Pakistan .

  • Respected Incharge,
    Assalamu Aalikum ,
    I am Nazia Nazir from Muslim family and I have completed my all Islamic study from Islamic Institution of Toba Tek Singh . Today I have visited your website.Its realy wonderful work.I have desire to become the part of your Organization . I am able to do translation work.If you have translation work this is my request kindly contact with me. I am able to do Translation and recording work in some Pakistani Languages.
    Our National Language is Urdu and some other Provinces Languages. I do Islamic Translation work in Low and proper rates in Urdu, Punjabi , Sindhi and Saraikie.I am also able to do Recording work.
    I see on your site that you have working on different Languages in different countries.
    Hopefuly you will Contact with me soon.
    Nazia Nazir

  • Excellent job Sr. Naiyerah. Your review is written and comprehensive. Why Islam is considering adopting this translation vs. others. Jazakillahu Khairan!

  • Helpful and beneficial, but we need to ponder on how the language of Islam would find its best expression in English.

    Just an example:
    Should we learn Surah an-Nas as ”People” or how? How can our children communicate with the rest of Muslim Ummah if they learn Surah an-Nas as ”People”.

    English is the lingua franca of the world, but we have(and had) our own lingua franca, which is(was) Arabic. It is not an issue of Arabization, but perhaps something could be learnt from the experience of Arabic with such languages as Urdu, Turkish or Persian.

  • salam alaykum. I am a convert to Islam and English is my second language. I found this translation by Abdel Haleem the best of all, and I read so far translations done by Y.Ali and by Pickthal – these were so difficult that I am really glad I found A.Haleem version… In my language translation of Quran is not good at all so I only red in English. I advise everyone to see how this translation is nice, so easy to read, so easy to understand mashallah I hope someone translate Quran the same way to my Polish laguage, inshallah salam alaykum

  • This translation is really very friendly to digest. But only thing I strongly dislike – why he has taken out the word “Allah” from entire translation? and replaced it by God?

Leave a Comment