In many cases the Arabic words and phrases are so pregnant of meaning that a Translator would be in despair unless he were allowed to explain all that he understands by them. I think such notes are necessary for a full understanding of the Text. He has provided fairly full summaries of the Sūras, section by section, but he has practically no notes to his Text. Hafiz Gulām Sarwar’s translation (published in 1930 or 1929) deserves to be better known than it is. But they have been published without the Arabic Text. There are two other Muslim translations of great merit. But the English of the Text is decidedly weak, and is not likely to appeal to those who know no Arabic. It is a scholarly work, and is equipped with adequate explanatory matter in the notes and the Preface, and a fairly full Index. Its Lahore Anjuman has published Maulvi Muhammad ‘Alī’s translation (first edition in 1917), which has passed through more than one edition. Its Qādiyān Anjuman published a version of the first Sīpāra in 1915. The Ahmadīya Sect has also been active in the field. My dear friend, the late Nawwāb ‘Imād-ul-Mulk Saiyid Husain Bilgrāmī of Hyderabad, Deccan, translated a portion, but he did not live to complete his work. Mīrzā Hairat of Delhi also published a translation, (Delhi 1919): the Commentary which he intended to publish in a separate volume of Introduction was, as far as I know, never published. Muhammad ‘Abdul Hakim Khān, of Patiala, 1905. In the notes to this copy of the Quran’s translation, Abdullah Yusuf Ali writes, “The first Muslim to undertake an English translation was Dr.

Surah ayatul kursi translation in urdu