3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
DUA KHATMI AL-QURAN IN TAFSIR OF ALYTUS (1723)
ONE OF THE OLDEST MANUSCRIPT OF THE TATARS OF GRAND DUCHY OF
LITHUANIA
Magdalena Lewicka
Arabic Language and Culture Center
Faculty of Languages
Nicolaus Copernicus University - Poland
magdalewicka@umk.pl
ABSTRACT
The literature of Polish-Lithuanian Tatars constitutes the most important and richest part of their
cultural heritage as well as a lasting trace of Tatar settlements in the Polish-Lithuanian
Commonwealth. This literature is not an easy subject of research. On the one hand, difficulties arise
from the limited access to old writings which are held in private hands or library collections in postSoviet countries. Another reason is the content and form of these works, written in Arabic script in
Belarusian and Polish, interspersed with Turkish and Arabic texts. Combined with the enormous
diversity of the content and peculiar character of these manuscripts, anonymity of authors and
impossibility of chronological ordering, all these factors pose a considerable challenge to the
exploration of the field referred to by researchers as “kitabistics” (a term derived from the most
representative type of manuscript, the kitab). The paper is dedicated to the analysis (identification,
textual and philological discription) of Dua khatmi al-Quran - the text present on the last pages of the
Tefsir of Olita (1723), one of the oldest copies of the so-called Tafsir of the Tatars of the Grand Duchy
of Lithuania, the first Slavic (Polish/ Belarusian) and the third, after the Latin and the Italian,
translation of the Quran rendered directly from the original text written in Arabic into a European
language.
Keywords: kitabistics, Tatars manuscripts, Tatars of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Arabic script in
Belarusian and Polish, Dua khatmi al-Quran, Tafsir of Alytus
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 - Introduction
Tafsir of Alytus belongs to the works which comprise the core of Tatar literary manuscripti, whose
development and unique character – making it a phenomenon to which great spiritual, literary and
cultural value is ascribed – is inseparably connected with the history of Tatar settlement in the
territory of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. This “membership” in the basic part of the Tatar literary
output does not only derive from the fact that it represents one of the oldest relics of this literature,
but mostly due to the fact that it is one of the transcriptions (also the oldest) of the so called Tafsir
of the GDL Tatars, the first Slavic (Polish/Belarusian) and at the same time the third (after Latin,
published in 1543 and its Italian translation of 1547) translation of the Quran translated directly from
the Arabic source into a European language. This protograph, unfortunately not preserved to
contemporary times, was created in the second half of 16th century, hence in the Reformation
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
104
period when the translation of the sacred books (The Bible, among others) into vernacular languages
flourished and in accordance with the Muslim rule of iz (that is the prohibition of translating the
original Arabic Quran into other languages) took the form and status of tafsir, that is the “comment,
interpretation, explanation”, however, in reality it contains an accurate, interlinear translation of the
Holy Book of Islam into the contemporary Polish with some element of the (old-)Belarusian.
2 - Genesis of the literary manuscripts of the GDL Tatars
The development of the Tatar literary manuscripts and its unique character are inseparably
connected with the history of the settlement of this tribe originating from the steppes of Mongolia
in the territory of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (Following works discuss the history of the Tatar
settlement in the territory of the former Republic of Poland: Talko-Hryncewicz, 1924; Kryczyoski,
1935; Kryczyoski, 1938; Kryczyoski 1997-1998; Tyszkiewicz, 1989; Tyszkiewicz, 2002; Tyszkiewicz,
2008; Sobczak, 1984; Borawski, 1986; Borawski, 1991; Borawski, 1983; Borawski, Dubioski, 1986;
Grygajtis, 2003; Łowmiaoski, 1983; Dumin, 1991; Dumin 2006; Kołodziejczyk 1997; Konopacki, 2006;
Konopacki, 2010; Dziadulewicz, 1986. Katalogi zabytków tatarskich: Gutowski, 1997; Drozd, Dziekan,
Majda, 1999; Drozd, Dziekan, Majda, 2000; Kołodziejczyk, 1998). Its outset dates back to the time of
king Gediminas´s reign (1305-1341), and the first reference to Tatars living in Lithuania appears in
the chronicles of the Italian Franciscan, Lucas Wadding: “Our brothers departed to proclaim the
teachings of Christ in the Lithuanian lands, where they found a whole nation engulfed in the
barbarian errors and dedicated to the cult of fire, among them the Scythians, coming from the
country of a khan, who use Asian language in the prayers” (Borawski, 1986, p. 5), while the first
information about Tatars with the name of this ethnic group is noted in Jan Długosz´s chronicle:
“Alexander or Vytautas the Duke of Lithuania, having reconciled with Svitrigaila, wanted to prove
himself to be a Christian duke, embarked on the first raid against the Tatars. He attacked the main
settlement of them, called the Horde, and many thousand barbarians with their wives, children and
cattle were taken to Lithuania” (Łyszczarz, 2013, p. 74).
The Tatar settlement proceeded in two main stages, the first occurring in 14 th and 15th centuries
was connected with the flow of the Tatars from the empire of the Golden Horde and khanates
located on the banks of the Volga River. This migration movement was based on the compulsory
Islamization conducted by Uzbeg Khan (1312-1342), but in the end, migration to the west of Asia had
not protected the Tatars from Islamization. The development of the Tatar settlement of this period
can be attributed to the Grand Duke of Lithuania - Vytautas (1392-1430), who granted Tatars the
land and privileges (guaranteeing the freedom of religion at the same time) in exchange for military
service and help in fighting the Teutonic knights, which contributed to the massive relocation to
Lithuania. The second stage of the settlement occurred between the 16th and 18th centuries, at first
due to the settling of the war prisoners captured during the war with the Crimea Horde, and then
because of the migration of the civilians from Kazan and Astrakhan Khanates fleeing from the
Russian occupation. By the end of the 17th century the Tatars settled in the territory of the Crown
where King John III Sobieski granted them the demesnes in Podlasie district (the contemporary
history of the Tatar community is discussed in the following works: Miśkiewicz, 1990; Miśkiewicz,
1993; Miśkiewicz, 2009; Miśkiewicz, Kamocki, 2004; Czerwonnaja, Chazbijewicz, 2014. Monographs
dedicated to the issues of this community include: Warmioska, 1999; Łyszczarz, 2013). After the
partitions and fall of the Republic of Poland the majority of territories settled by the Tatars became
the part of the Tsardom of Russia, after World War I (apart from the Kaunas province belonging to
the Republic of Lithuania) it was within the territory of the independent Poland. After World War II,
when the Kresy (Eastern Borderlands) were lost by Poland the Tatars have been living in territory of
Poland, Lithuania and Belarus (brief description of the history of the Tatar settlement in the territory
of Poland, including the genesis, waves of migration, social and legal status of the settlers and their
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
105
role in the military can be found in Konopacki, 2010, pp. 22-58). Six hundred years’ long presence in
these territories (including 350 years within the current borders of Poland) made them a part of
Polish nation, in particular distinguishing themselves in the military history of the Republic of Poland
by participation in the fight for freedom, independence and playing an important part in all the
major military events in the history of Poland (Thirteen Years’ War (1458-1466), the raid of
Vladislaus II of Hungary to Czech Republic (1471), battles of Buczyna (1588), Cecora (1620), Chocim
(1621), Beresteczko (1651), Polish-Swedish war (1655), Bar Confederation (1768-1772), Kościuszko
Uprising (1794), November Uprising (1830) January Uprising (1863), World War I and II).
An introduction to the characteristics of the Tatar literary manuscripts should consist in their
genesis, including the sources and provenance and definition of the period when they developed. As
much as the discussion of the conditions of the development and traditions it is deeply rooted in is
not a difficult task, the indication of the moment in time when the writings of the GDL Tatars come
into existence is almost impossible. The Tatars’ literary heritage includes exclusively religious
literature; they had not produced (until the end of the Republic of Poland) any historic or polemical
works. The only exception is the non-preserved, but mentioned in the later sources, work of
Azulewicz Apologia Tatarów, issued in 1630 in Vilnius as a reply to the squib of Piotr Czyżniewski (see
Konopacki, 2014). There are no relics representing the earliest period, and the first text recognized
by the scholars which describes the Tatar society does not mention any literary activity (hence it can
be deduced that Tatar books had not been written at that time), which gives rise to authenticity
reservations (Risale-i Tatar-i Leh, Traktat o Tatarach polskich, of 1558, Polish translation A.
Muchlioski in 1858). Indirect presumptions including textological and philological analysis of the
content and research on the historic context (including the influence of reformation and counterreformation) give a basis to the assumption that the birth of the Tatar literary manuscript occurs in
the second half of the 16th century.
The determinants assumed as the reasons of its development can be brought down to two
factors. The first of them is the process of linguistic assimilation, which caused the Tatars, who were
the ethnic, cultural and religious minority of the new country, to lose the command of their own
language (Turkic dialects) and oriental languages facilitating contacts with their co-religious (Turkish)
and religious practices (Arabic) for the languages functioning in the GDL – Polish and Belorussian.
The process which had been in continuous progress since the 15th century and ended in the second
half of the next century was one of the causes for undertaking the activities regarding the translation
of the religious books into Slavic languages known by the Tatars, since on the one hand the doctrinal
issues forced them to use the Arabic texts in the rites and liturgy, and on the other hand these texts
became – in the conditions of the isolation from the sources and roots of Islam – the only carrier of
their religious knowledge. According to Szynkiewicz (1935a, p.141) the archetype of the manuscripts
were the books written in Chagatai language, brought by the members of the Golden Horde, which
seems to be confirmed by texts in this language including supplications for the religious services and
the Quran surah Ja Sin present in the Tatar literature. These books were to become the basic binder
allowing the GDL Tatars to retain their ethnic distinctiveness and cultural identity (Zakrzewski, 1989;
Borawski, 1992), which in the 16th century – as it seems – had been identified exclusively by their
denomination - Islam (religious services and practice of the Tatar society are discussed in Konopacki,
2010). The process of the linguistic assimilation of the Tatar community was probably based on the
fact that its members varied as far as their origin is concerned and used different dialects. In the light
of the lack of the earlier developed feeling of the ethnic community (such a community was not
created until the period of the GDL, and it was not joined by the ethnic and linguistic factors, but by
a political one), their languages (dialects) originated in the steppes were not a unifying determinant,
especially due to the fact that they were not the carriers of the religious traditions (Łapicz, 1986b,
pp. 29-30, 52-54). It is worth emphasizing that the rank of the sacral language is reserved for Arabic,
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
106
as the language of the Holy Book, The Quran. However, in the Tatar liturgy and writings Turkish also
played this role. In the sphere connected with religion, Tatar language was replaced by the so called
Belarusian ethnolect functioning in writing and in speaking. In the sphere of the daily
communication, the Tatars used Belarusian dialects, accompanied among the elite– since 16th
century – by Polish language of the northern Kresy borderland (further discussion of this subject:
Drozd, 2000b; Radziszewska, 2010, pp. 10-11).
The other element which certainly influenced the shaping and development of the Tatar literary
output is set in the historical context, and is connected with the cultural and spiritual revival of the
Republic of Poland attributed to the Renaissance and the Reformation which caused the Tatar
society to create their own literature reflecting its distinctiveness and providing the core of their
cultural heritage (works discussing Tatar literature and linguistic heritage - in Polish literature:
Kraczkowski, 1952; Szynkiewicz, 1935a, pp. 138-143; Szynkiewicz, 1932, pp. 188-195; Szynkiewicz,
1935b; Woronowicz, 1935, pp. 376-394; Zajączkowski, 1851, pp. 307-313; Konopacki, 1966, pp. 193204; Łapicz, 1986; Łapicz, Jankowski, 2000; Łapicz, 2008, pp. 31-49; Drozd, 1999; Kulwicka-Kamioska,
2004; Kulwicka-Kamioska, 2013; Kulwicka-Kamioska, 2015).
3 - Characteristic features of the literary manuscripts of the GDL Tatars
Among the characteristic features of the literary output of the GDL Tatars the following attributes
have to be listed in the first place: the manuscript-like form of the books; anonymity of the authors,
multilingualism resulting from the presence of the Slavic (Polish and Belarusian) and oriental (Arabic,
Turkish, Persian) linguistic layer; heterogenic character (in relation to volume, genologic
classification and themes) and finally, the most distinguishing element of this literature: the way of
notation consisting in the exclusive usage of the Arabic alphabet to write down the texts (both
oriental and Slavic) included in the content of the books.
Two factors decided about the manuscript-like character of the Tatars’ literary output. The first of
them, particularly significant, was surely the reference to the literary output present in the world of
Islam, especially regarding the religious literature, which due to the high rank of the calligraphy was
subjected to the printing process quite late (calligraphy had been one of the key forms of art in the
light of the ban on figurative representation) and in the context of the religious texts, manual
copying of the books became ritual in form. Additionally, the manuscript form was favoured by the
local cultural context, namely the return to the manuscripts characteristic for the period of
Sarmatism, for this is the period when the formation and the development of the Tatar works of this
kind took place (Drozd, 2000b, pp. 24-26).
Anonymity, as a typical feature of all the manuscript literature, is also characteristic for the
discussed Tatar works. Only two names of authors, regarding these works, are known: Hodyna (Kitab
of 1645) and Uriah son of Ismail (Tafsir dated for 1686), as opposed to the scribes who often
disclosed their names in colophons. Surely, bearing in mind the excellent command of Arabic and
other Oriental languages and the general erudition of the Tatar authors, resulting from the character
of their work, including the compilation and adaptation of the texts of Slavic and Middle Eastern
provenance, they were the representatives of the intellectual elite of the Tatar society. What is
significant in this context, the impossibility of discovering their personal information, and the
following anonymous character of the Tatar literary output implicates a major hindrance in the
process of chronological definition, which can only be based on the indirect presumptions:
philological and contextual analysis, dates of the subsequent copies of the books, historical, social
context, etc. (the subject of the authors and scribes is discussed in: Kulwicka-Kamioska, 2013, pp. 5758, 93-97, 108-110; Drozd, 2000b, pp. 33-34; Konopacki, 2015, pp. 271-286).
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
107
Another, immanent, feature of the Tatar manuscript output is the multilingualism, reflected in
the mutual interleaving of the oriental layer, in the form of such languages as Arabic, Turkish and, to
a lower extent, Persian, and the Slavic layer represented by Polish spoken in the northern Kresy
borderlands in the initial stage of its development and the old-Belarusian language (Drozd, 2000b;
Łapicz, 1986a; Akiner, 1973; Akiner 1980). The latter contains numerous borrowings and oriental
influences (Turkish and Tatar, Arabic, Persian), mostly in the range of lexis and phraseology
regarding the rituals and religious beliefs. The oriental texts are, first of all, connected with the
liturgy and prayer body, mostly the verses and surahs of the Quran in Arabic, as well as Arabic and
Turkish prayer formulas (Drozd, 2000b, pp. 17-21; Kulwicka-Kamioska, 2013, pp. 60-63; Łapicz,
1986a, pp. 217-218). The study of such a vast and linguistically varied text requires the continuous
cooperation of Slavists (especially Polonists and Belarutenists) and orientalists (especially Arabic
scholars and Turkologists), due to the necessity of connecting the knowledge on Polish and
Belarusian diachronic linguistics with the wide orientalistic competence (Arabic, Turkologic, Islamic)
as well as theory and history of the translation of the sacred books including theolinguistics.
As far as the most distinguishing element of this literature is concerned, namely – the way of
notation, consisting in the exclusive usage of the Arab alphabet to write down both the Oriental and
Slavic layer of the texts (the subject of manuscript transliteration and transcription of the Tatar
literature is discussed in: Teoretyczne aspekty badania piśmiennictwa Tatarów – muzułmanów
Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego oraz Praktyka badawcza: systemy transliteracji i transkrypcji [in:]
Łapicz, Kulwicka-Kamioska, 2015, pp. 29-202), it was the reference to the manuscript culture,
especially of religious character, present in the world of Islam. The basis of adopting the Arabic
alphabet instead of using the Slavic graphs, was surely a particular respect paid to religious books
and Arabic writing (which was used to write down the Quran), because the sacral value was
contained not only in the content of the books but also in the form of the graphs used in the
notation. The Arabic alphabet was also functioning outside the Tatar literary manuscripts, namely
the grave epitaphs, sacral ornamentation, and often in private writings (letters, documents,
signatures of the documents), all the more that the Tatars preserved the ability to use the Arabic
writing until 20th century, even though their excellent command of this language was lost in the
course of centuries. What is particularly significant in this context, the Arabic alphabet must have
been adapted to write down the Slavic texts, or to be more precise the phonologic system of these
languages through the introduction of the additional graphemes and change of the phonetic value of
some existing letters.
It seems that adopting the classification proposed by Drozd (1995, pp. 33-47) is most justified for
the detailed and clear characteristics of the Tatar literary output. It is based on the criteria of the
content and form, which allows the delineation of the following types of the manuscripts: basic
books including the manuscripts of The Quran, tafsirs, kitabs and chamails; auxiliary books including
tajwids, sufras, vocabularies, amulets represented by dalawars, hramotkas and nuskas, and finally
the last group: tables and muhirs.
4 - Tafsir of Alytus – one of the oldest manuscript copies of the Tafsir of the GDL Tatars
The manuscript which is the subject of the analysis contained in this paper is kept in the private
collection of a family of Alytus and is dated of 1723, it contains 485 pages measuring 33 x 18,5 cm. It
was made by the son of Mustapha Ismail Jabłooski (further referred to as MIJ), whose name and
surname is written in the colophon (p. 483a) and in the next century (1836) Jibrahim Januszewski
(further referred to as JJ) corrected the text, which is confirmed by entries in Polish and Arabic
contained in the final page of the manuscript (p. 485 b). The handwriting of both scribes is clear, the
subsequent pages contain various annotations of different chronology, some of them are written in
Latin alphabet, with black or red-brown ink (in some places the red-brown is overwritten with the
black ink, especially in the text of the under verse translation). The top left hand corner contains
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
108
Arabic pagination (the notation is partially imperfect), each page contains, on average, 8 verses of
the Arabic text with under verse translation, however, the Arabic linguistic layer, in a vast part,
features punctuation marks in the form of dots written in red ink marking the borders of the Ayah.
As far as the categorisation of the text is concerned, the Tafsir mostly contains the subsequent
surahs of the Holy Book of Islam (p.1 – dedication of 1806, signed Józefowicz, p. 2a-3a – entries in
Polish, written with Latin alphabet (family matters), p. 3b-4b, Arabic text, p. 5a-478a tafsir, p. 478b479b intentional prayer , p. 480a-480b – table of contents including the names of surahs and
pagination, p. 481a-482a – entries in Polish, written in Latin alphabet, p. 482b-485b – tafsir),
preceded with a short announcement regarding the content (the first surah and the beginning of the
second one are preceded with a framed announcement), while in the linguistic layer one should
indicate the Arabic referring to the Quran text and Polish with some elements of Belarusian in the
under verse translation.
The material analyzed by the author of this paper consisted of three pages, 478b, 479a, 479b,
the objective of the analysis was to decipher and transliterate the Arabic entries present in the
indicated material, adding the comment in the form of the footnotes, as well as identification of the
content.
p. 478b
1: bi-smi alii-llhiiii aliv-rramniv alvi-rrami /
[in the name of God Merciful, Compassionate! /]
2: adaqa alvii-llhuviii alix-amu axl-fallmuxi / wa-balaaxii raslahu axiiil-kirmuxiv / wa-nanu
almqla rabbinxv
[this is the word of God Almighty /which he gave to his Noble Messenger /indeed, we hold on to
what was said by our Lord,]
3: liqunxvi wa-rziqunwa-mawlnmina alxvii-hidna / alxviiilahummaxix rabbanxx taqabbal
minnatma alxxi-Qurn(i)xxii
[the Maker, he who blesses us / our Lord, through the witnesses / oh God, Lord, accept the stamp of
Quran from us]
4: wa-tanxxiii wa-tarannmkna fxxiv tilwatihi min ainxxv awxxvi nisynin / awxxvii tarifin
kalimatin an
[deliver us and protect us from any mistakes in recitation [of the Holy Book], omission/ or
deformation of the word]
5: mawiih/ awxxviii tayirixxix arfin / awxxx taqdmin / awxxxi tarin / aw ziydatinxxxii /
awxxxiii nuqnin/
[from its correct form / change of letter / too hasty / or too slow recitation / adding / or omitting]
6: awxxxiv tawlin al m anzaltahuxxxv awxxxvi raybin / awxxxvii akkin awxxxviii talin inda
tilwatihi awxxxix
[interpretion of what was revealed, lack of confidence/ doubt, too quick recitation]
7: kasalin awxl suratin awxli zayi alxlii-llisni / awxliii waqfin bi-ayri waqfin / awxliv irminxlv biayri
[or too slow, excessive haste, wrapping the tongue / stopping without need / inclusion without]
8: muramin / awxlvi ihrinxlvii biayri baynin / awxlviii maddin awxlix taddin awl hamzatinli awlii
uzmin awliii
[need / revealing without need / setting madda, shadda, hamza, sukna or]
9: irbinliv bi-ayri maknin / fktubuhulv minn al allvi-ttammi wa-allvii-kamli / wa-allviiimuhazzabi min kulli
[setting the vocalization mark in the wrong place / I am writing it as precisely as possible, in a perfect
way, devoid of any]
10: allix-ilnilx / ffirlxi lan y rabbhulxii ya sayyidhulxiii / l tuin y mawln
wrzuqnlxiv fala
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
109
[language mistakes / forgive us God / forgive us Lord and bless for]
11: mqaranhu / muaddiyan aqqahu maa allxv-ailxvi wa-allxvii-qalbi wa-allxviii-llisni / wahab lanbihi
[what we read / giving the truth with our bodies, hearts and tongues / for that, grant us]
12: allxix-ayralxx wa-allxxi-ssadatalxxii wa-allxxiii-buratalxxiv wa-allxxv-amnalxxvi / wa-ltatum lan
bi-allxxvii-irri wa-allxxviii-aqwatilxxix
[with success, happiness, good news and safety / and deliver us from evil, hardships]
13: wa-allxxx-allati wa-allxxxi-ufyni / wa-nabbihn qabla allxxxii-many an nawmi allxxxiiiaflati wa-allxxxiv-kasallxxxv
[error and vegetaion / wake us before death from the sleep of levity and laziness]
14: ni / aminanlxxxvi min abi allxxxvii-qabri / wa-min suli allxxxviii-munkari wa-allxxxix-nnakri / wamin akli alxc-ddaxci
[so that we are safe from the torment in the grave/ Al-Munkar’s and Al-Nakir’s questions / and
eating wo-]
15: ydni / wa-bayyi wuhanyawma alxcii-bai / wa-atiqxciii riqbanaxciv mina alxcv-nnirnixcvi /
[-rms / clear our faces on the Day of Resurrection / and deliver us from the hellfire /]
16: wa-yammin kitban/ wa-yassir isban/ wa-aqqil mznanbi-alxcvii-asanti / wa-abbit
[bless our book / and make the Final Judgement easy / and weigh our scales with good deeds /
strengthen]
17: aqdmanxcviii al alxcix-iri / wskinc fci wasai alcii-inni / wrzuqnciii
iwra(i)civMuammadin
[our feet on Siratcv / and place us in the middle of Paradise / grant us with the nighbourhood of
Muhammad]
18: alayhi alcvi-altucvii wa-alcviii-ssalmu / wa-akrimncix bi-liqika ya rayyni / istaib
duncx bi-aqqi
[prayer and peace be with him / give us the honour or meeting You, oh You full of abundance/
answer our prayers with truth]
19: alcxi-ttawrayticxii / wa-alcxiii-inlicxiv wa-alcxv-zzabri / wa-alcxvi-furqni alcxvii-aimucxviii / aincxix
ama m
[of Torah / the Gospel, Psalms / and Magnificent Quran / give us everything we]
20: saalankacxx bihi fcxxi alcxxii-ssirri wa-alcxxiii-alnicxxiv wa-zidnbi-falika alcxxv-wsiati bi-dika
[asked for overtly and in secret, grant us, in your benignity with your generosity]
21: wa-karamikacxxvi y akramacxxvii alcxxviii-akramnacxxix / wa-y aramacxxx alcxxxi-rrimna /
alcxxxiilahummacxxxiii allcxxxiv al
[and largess, oh, the most generous of the generous ones / grant us with your grace, oh, the most
gracious of the gracious ones/ Oh Lord pray for]
22: Muammadin ibi alcxxxv-arati wa-alcxxxvi-burhni / bi-ramatika y aramucxxxvii alrrimna / alcxxxviiilahummacxxxix
[Muhammad, the law-giver, carrier of the testimony/ with your grace, oh the most gracious of the
gracious ones, oh Lord]
23: anamncxl wrfancxli bi-alcxlii-Qurni alcxliii-ami / wa-brik lanbi-alcxliv-yticxlv wa-alcxlviikri alcxlvii-akmi /
[make us pleasant to you and elevate with this Magnificen Quran / bless us with these verses and
wise mentioning the God /]
24: wa-taqabbal minn innakacxlviii antacxlix alcl-ssamu alcli-almu / wa-tub alayn innakaclii
antacliii alcliv-ttawwbu alclv-rramu /
[and accept them from us, since you are the listener and omniscient / have mercy on us, for you are
merciful and compassionate /]
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
110
25: alclvilahummaclvii zayyin bi-znati alclviii-Qurniclix / wlbisnclx bi-almati alclxi-Qurni /
wdilnclxii alclxiii-annata maa
[make the Quran our ornament /and our robe / and bring us to Paradise with]
26: alclxiv-Qurn(i)clxv / wa-fin min kulli baliclxvi alclxvii-dduny wa-abi alclxviii-iraticlxix
maa alclxx-Qurni / wramclxxi/
[the Quran / and deliver us from all the suffering of this world and torment of the nether world /
have mercy]
p. 479a
1: ama ummatinclxxii muammadin alayhi al-altu wa-alclxxiii-ssalmu / maa alclxxiv-Qurni /
alclxxvlahummaclxxvi ial(i)clxxvii alclxxviii-Qurniclxxix lanf
[upon the whole ummaclxxx of Muhammad, peace and prayer be with Him/ with the Quran/ oh Lord
please make the Quran my]
2: al-ddunyqarban / wa-falclxxxi-qabri mnisanclxxxii wa-falclxxxiii-qiymati afan / wa-alairi nran wa
[close companion in this world / a friend in my grave, intercessor on the Day or Resurrection/ and a
light over Sirat and
3: ilclxxxiv al-annati rafqan / wa-mina alclxxxv-nnari satran wa-iban / wa-ilalclxxxvi-ayrti
kullihdallan wa-imman
[companion on the way to the Paradise /screen from the fires of hell and protection / proof of all
good deeds and a guide
4: bi-falika wudika wa-karamikaclxxxvii y akramuclxxxviii alclxxxix-akramnacxc / wa-y aramucxci
alcxcii-rrimna / alcxciiilahummacxciv
[thanks to You, Your presence and generosity, oh the most generous of the generous ones, oh the
most merciful of the merciful ones, oh Lord]
5: ihdinbi-hidyati alcxcv-Qurni wa-finbi-inyati al-Qurni / wa-nainmin-a alcxcvinnirnicxcvii / bi-karmati
[lead us on the path of the Quran and grant that it protects us / deliver us from the hellfire with the
generosity]
6: alcxcviii-Qurni / wdilncxcix alcc-annata(i)cci bi-ifaati alccii-Qurni / wrfacciii daratina
bi-falati alcciv-Qurni /
[of Quran / lead us into the Paradise with the intercession of the Quran / and make us be elevated
with it /
7: wa-kaffir ann sayyitin bi-tilwaticcv alccvi-Qurni / y ccvii al-fali wa-al-isni /
alccviiilahummaccix urzuqnccx
[shunt evil deeds away from us due to the recitation of the Quran / You, the perfect one and full of
merit/ grant us]
8: bi-kulli arfin min-a alccxi-Qurni alwatanccxii / wa-bi-kulli kalamaticcxiii karamatinccxiv / wa-bikulli yatinccxv sadatinccxvi wa-bi-kulli
[a pleasant prize for letter of the Quran / generosity for each word / happiness for each verse, for
each]
9: sratinccxvii salmatinccxviii / wa-bi-kulli uzin azan / alccxixlahummaccxx urzuqnccxxi bi-alccxxiialificcxxiii alfatanccxxiv / wa-bi-alccxxv-bi barakatinccxxvi /
[surah give us success / for each djuzccxxvii with a prize / oh God, grant us – for the letter alif –
kindness / blessing for letter b]
10: wa-bi-alccxxviii-tti tawyatanccxxix / wa-bi-alccxxx-i awban / wa-bi-alccxxxi-mi amlan /
wa-alccxxxii-i ikmatan / wa-bi-alccxxxiii-i ulnanccxxxiv / wa
[repentance for letter  / prize for good for letter  / beauty for letter m / wisdom for letter
 / gratification for letter /]
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
111
11: wa-bi-alccxxxv-ddli dunuwwan / wa-bi-alccxxxvi-li akawtan / wa-bi-alccxxxvii-rrramatan /
wa-bi-alccxxxviii-zzzulfatan / wa-bi-alccxxxix-ssni
[closeness for letter dl / dexterity for letter l /mercy for letter r / flattery for letter z /for
the letter sn]
12: sanan / wa-bi-alccxl-ni ifan / wa-bi-alccxli-di idqan / wa-bi-alccxlii-i iyan
/ wa-bi-alccxliii-i arwatanccxliv /
[give us majesty /grant us health for letter n / honesty for letter d /brightness for letter 
/ tenderness for letter /]
13: wa-bi-alccxlv-i ufranccxlvi / wa-bi-alccxlvii-ayni ilman / wa-bi-alccxlviii-ayni aniyyan / wa-bialccxlix-fi faraan / wa-bi-alccl-qfi qurbatanccli /
[success for letter  / knowledge for letter ain / wealth for letter ayn / joy for letter f /
closeness for letter qf ]
14: wa-bi-alcclii-kfi kifyatan / wa-bi-alccliii-llmi lufan / wa-bi-alccliv-mm mawiatan / wa-bi-alcclvnnni nran / wa-bi-alcclvi-wwicclvii wafan /
[ satisfaction for letter kf / kindness for letter lm / advice for letter mm / light for letter nn /
loyalty for letter ww /
15: wa-bi-alcclviii-hi hidyatan / wa-bi-alcclix-llmi alcclx-alficclxi liqan / wa-bi-alcclxii-yi yusran /
wa-allalcclxiii-llhucclxiv alsayyidin
[leading [on the right path] for letter h/ meeting for the thousandth letter lm / well-being for
letter y/ let God pray for our Lord]
16: muammadin wa-alihicclxv wa-abihi amanacclxvi / alcclxvii-ayyibna alcclxviii-hirna /
alcclxixlahummacclxx balli awban qaraanhu
[Muhammad, for his whole kin and companions / good and pure / oh Lord, grant us a prize for what I
have read]
17: mqaraanhu / wa-nawwir mtalaanhu / li-ricclxxi muammadin alayhi alcclxxii-ssaltu
wa-alcclxxiii-ssalmu / wa-li-l-arwicclxxiv
[what I have read / enlighten us with what I recited / the soul of Muhammad, prayer and peace be
with him/ and the souls]
18: awldihicclxxv wa-azwihicclxxvi / wa-li-l-abihicclxxvii riwnacclxxviii alcclxxix-llhicclxxx tal
alayhim amanacclxxxi / wa-l-arwcclxxxii
[of his children and wives / and his companions, may God the Highest be content with all of them /
and the so-]
19: i abincclxxxiii wa-ummihtincclxxxiv wa-abnincclxxxv wa-iwnincclxxxvi waadiqincclxxxvii wa-ustdincclxxxviii / wa-mayiin]
[uls of our fathers and mothers, our sons, our siblings, our friends, our teacher / and the shahs]
20: aatancclxxxix wa-li-l-arwiccxc ami alccxci-muminna wa-alccxcii-muminticcxciii wa-alccxcivmuslimna wa-alccxcv-muslimti / alccxcvi-ayuccxcvii
[especially the souls of all the believing men and women, Muslim men and Muslim women / living]
21: minhum wa-lccxcviii-amwtuccxcix mmatan wa-li-ami ibi alccc-ayrticcci wa-alccciiasanti / mina alccciii-muminna wa-alccciv-mucccv
[and the dead, all those who make good deeds / from among the Muslim men and Muslim]
22: minti / bi-ramatika y aramucccvi alcccvii-rrimna / alcccviiilahummacccix unurn man
naara alcccx-ddnicccxi wzulcccxii
[women / due to Your grace, oh the most gracious of the gracious ones, oh God, support us, the
ones who defend the faith and protect]
23: man azala alcccxiii-muslimna / yrabbicccxiv alcccxv-lamna / bi-ramatika yaramucccxvi
alcccxvii-rrimna / subna
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
112
Those who protected the Muslims /amen, Lord of the worlds / due to Your grace, oh the most
gracious of the gracious ones / great]
24: rabbika rabbi alcccxviii-izzaticccxix amm yaifna / wa-salmun al alcccxx-mursalna / waalcccxxi-amdu li-llhi rabbi alcccxxii-lamna /
[Lord, Lord of glory, for what they praise / peace be with the Messengers / thanks be to God, the
Lord of the worlds/
25: bi-smi alcccxxiii-llhicccxxiv alcccxxv-rramnicccxxvi alcccxxvii-rrami / y rabbi antacccxxviii ilahuncccxxix
limun wa-ancccxxx abduka hilun acccxxxicccxxxii
[in the name of God the Merciful, Compassionate / Oh God, you are the omniscient God, I am merely
your servant who knows nothing]
26: salukacccxxxiii ancccxxxiv tazzuqncccxxxv ilman nfian attabudukacccxxxvi biilmika wa-illcccxxxvii
ahlaktucccxxxviii yrabbi antacccxxxix ilahuncccxl
[I beg You to grant me the useful knowledge so I can serve you with it, otherwise I shall be
condemned to perdition, oh God, you are a God of]
p. 479b
1: aniyyun wa-an abduka faqrun asalukacccxlii ancccxliii tafancccxliv att l adncccxlv
mimmatucccxlvi ilayhicccxlvii ayincccxlviii
[wealth, I am but a poor servant of yours / please protect me, so that I lack nothing]
2: min umri alcccxlix-dduny wa-illcccl ahlaktucccli y rabbi antaccclii ilahuncccliii qdirun wa-ancccliv
abduka afun asalukaccclv
[of the temporal matters, otherwise I shall be condemned to perdition, oh God, you are the
omnipotent God, I am but a weak servant of yours, please]
3: anccclvi tuninccclvii attalaba alccclviii-ayna fccclix alccclx-wqiticcclxi bi-quwwatika waillccclxii ahlaktuccclxiii alccclxivlahummaccclxv
[strengthen me, so I can defeat Satan in combat with your strength, otherwise I shall be
condemened to perdition oh God]
4: nawwir qalbccclxvi bi-nri hidyatika kam nawwarta alccclxvii-ara bi-nri qudratika
alccclxviiilahummaccclxix accclxx
[enlighten my heart with the light of Your path, just as you enlightened Earth with the light of your
power, oh God]
5: riccclxxi min alccclxxii-ulumticcclxxiii alccclxxiv-uhli wkrimnccclxxv bi-nri alccclxxvi-ilmi wa-alccclxxviifahmi biazzaikaccclxxviii yazzu
[lead me out of the obscurity of ignorance and grant me the light of knowledge and understanding
with your power, oh powerful]
6: y ayyu y qayyumu wa-all alccclxxix-llhccclxxx al muammadin wa-alihiccclxxxi
amanaccclxxxii wa-amdu li-llhiccclxxxiii rabbi alccclxxxiv-lamna /
[[God] living, the protector, let God pray for Muhammad and his whole family, thanks be to God, the
Lord of the Worlds.]
The basis for the transliteration is ISO system (International Standarization Organization)ccclxxxv,
however, the basis of the conversion process to the Latin alphabet of the analyzed material consists
of the characteristic way of notation which remains an imminent feature of the Tatar relics of
literature, namely, the notation including the full vocalization, as opposed to the Arabic texts where
exclusively consonants, long vowels (, , ) and diphthongs (ay, aw)ccclxxxvi are noted. Referring to
the definition of the transliteration denoted as the representation of the graphemes of one alphabet
with the aid of the graphemes of the other alphabet, not including the phonetic properties of the
sounds marked by graphemes in the transliterated alphabet, the Author adopts all the graphemes
which consist in the notation of the analyzed material, both letters (including the letters belonging
to the alphabet and the ones that do not belong to this alphabet) and vocalization marks. The
cccxli
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
113
Author performs the transliteration of the text by assigning each Arabic letter to a counterpart in the
form of a Latin letter, rendering the notation in a graphic, not phonetic form, since this would mean
transcription, that is the conversion of the writing which consists in phonetic representation of the
features of the sounds marked with letters of one alphabet using the spelling system of another
alphabet and makes it impossible to recreate the original text (re-transliteration). For example:
- transliteration including all the graphemes (letters and marks): bi-smi al-llhi al-rramni alrrami
- transliteration including exclusively the letters: b-sm al-llh al-rmn al-rrm
- transcription: bi-smi llhi rramni rrami
Additionally, the alif letter in the initial position, depending on the accompanying mark in the
form of fata (vowel a), amma (vowel u) or kasra (vowel i) is transliterated by the author as a, u, i
respectively, although in the correct notation the letter should additionally feature the hamza mark.
The letter alif appearing in the initial position as one of the components of the definite article al- is
transliterated by the author as a, although in the correct notation the letter should additionally
feature the mark wala or hamza and fata.
5 - The conclusions of the textological and philological analysis
As far as the textological layer is concerned the studied material contains one of the few types of
supplicative prayer (du) quite common and widely known in the Arab world in many versions. In
the Arab and Muslim world the prayer is named as duatmi l-Qurn ("duah of the stamp of
the Quran"); one of its essential elements is du l-urf ("duah of the letters") consisting in
assigning each letter of the Arab alphabet to a defined feature starting with this letter which is
unfortunately lost in traslation (alif – alfa, b– baraka, etc.).
As far as the linguistic layer is concerned, one should indicate the following features of the
analyzed material:
- lack of the notation of hamza in the initial sound (above or below alif), whose notation is
obligatory in the Arabic texts, however in manuscript copies of the Quran it is quite often
omitted, for example min ain aw nisynin aw tarifin (p. 478b:4); wa-al-burata wa-alamna (p. 478b:12); aqdmanalal-iri (p. 478b:17), taqabbal minninnaka anta alssamu al-almu (p. 478b:2);
- lack of the notation of wala over alif letter which lost hamza (usually this occurs in case of the
defined article al-, where hamza is subject to elision), which in manuscripts of the Holy Book of
Islam happens very often, for example bi-smi al-llhi al-rramni al-rrami (p. 478b:1);
- marking the long vowel in the form of a vocalization mark, the so called “short alif” and not
alif letter, just as it occurs in the authentic Arabic texts, including the manuscripts of the Quran,
for example bi-smi al-llhi al-rramni al-rrami (p. 478b:1);
- using the notation of the long vowel with the aid of ww letter instead of alif, which occurs
in several words borrowed from Arameic, for example alayhi al-altu wa-al-ssalmu
(p.478b:18);
- characteristic way of connecting the letters dl, l, r, z, ww (not subjected to the
collocation on the left) with letters tmarba and h, as it seems, this is a form of a writing
manner and not a wrong notation consisting in connecting these letters, for example aw maddin
aw taddin aw hamzatin aw uzmin aw (p. 478b: 8); wa-bi-kulli yatin sadatin wa-bi-kulli
(p. 479a: 8);
- the notation of the long vowel in the final sound with the aid of alif maqra or yletters,
the former way of notation is characteristic for the Quran derived text, for example wa-tan
wa-tarannmkna ftilwatihi min ain [litera alif maqra] (p. 478b: 4); allahumma
ial(i) al-Qurni lanf[litera y] (p. 479a: 1).
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
114
- division of a word between the verses which does not occur in Arabic (interference from the
Latin), for example wa-al-allati wa-al-ufyni / wa-nabbihn qabla al-many an
nawmi al-aflati wa-al-kasal14: ni / aminan min abi al-qabri / wa-min suli al-munkari
wa-al-nnakri / wa-min akli al-dda 15: ydni (p. 478b: 13-15);
- wrong notation of letters tmarba and tmafta in the final sound, despite the clear
rule defining the usage of the former to the singular and the latter to the plural, probably
interference from Turkish and/or Persian, where such a non-standard spelling is present, for
example anamnwrfanbi-al-Qurni al-ami / wa-brik lanbi-al-yti wa-al-ikri
al-akmi [tmarba w miejscu tmafta] (p. 478b: 23); wa-bi-kulli yatin sadatin
[tmafta w miejscu tmarba] (p. 479a: 8);
- wrong notation of the letters or diacritics (in the form of dots written above or below a letter,
used to distinguish the phonemes), for example adaqa al-llhu al-amu al-fallmu *błędny
zapis litery fw miejscu litery kf] (p.478b: 2), liqunwa-rziqunwa-mawlnmina alhidna *błędny zapis litery w miejscu ] (p. 478b: 3);
- wrong notation of the vocalization marks, which means not only a spelling lapse (and
interference of the phonetic realization) but also implicates errors in the grammar layer
(declination, conjugation), for example adaqa al-llhu al-amu al-fallmu *błędny zapis
znaku wokalizacyjnego amma w miejscu znaku fata] (p. 478b: 2); taqabbal minnatma alQurn(i) [litera nn opatrzona dwoma znakami wokalizacyjnymi: sukn i fata] (p. 478b: 3);
allahumma ial(i) al-Qurni lanf[litera lm opatrzona dwoma znakami wokalizacyjnymi:
sukn i kasra] (p.479a: 1); sratin salmatin / wa-bi-kulli uzin azan [tanwn kasra w
miejscu tanwn fata] (p. 479a: 9).
References
Akiner, S. (2013). Treśd kitabu ze zbiorów Biblioteki brytyjskiej. In. J. Kulwicka-Kamioska & Cz. Łapicz
(Eds.), Tatarzy Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego w historii, języku i kulturze (pp. 339). Toruo:
Towarzystwo Naukowe, pp. 103-123.
Akiner, S. (1980). The religious vocabulary of the British Library Tatar-Byelorussian Kitab (pp. 589).
London: University of London.
Akiner, S. (1973). The vocabulary of a Byelorussian Kitab in the British museum. The Journal of
Byelorussian Studies, 3(1), 55-84.
Aleksandrowicz, M. (1935). Legendy, znachorstwo, wróżby i gusła ludu muzułmaoskiego w Polsce.
Rocznik Tatarski, t. II, pp. 368-375
Антонович, А.К. (1968). Белорусские тексты, писанные арабским письмом, и их графикоорфографическая система (pp. 418). Вильнюс: Вильнюсский гос. ун-т им. В. Капсукаса.
Borawski, P. (1992). Asymilacja kulturowa Tatarów w Wielkim Księstwie Litewskim. Odrodzenie i
Reformacja w Polsce, t. XXXVI, pp. 163-191.
Borawski, P. (1983). Sytuacja prawna ludności tatarskiej w Wielkim Księstwie Litewskim (XVI-XVIII
w.). Acta Baltico-Slavica, t. 15, pp. 55-76.
Borawski, P. (1986). Tatarzy w dawnej Rzeczypospolitej (pp. 317). Warszawa: Ludowa Spółdzielnie
Wydawnicza.
Borawski, P. (1991). Tatarzy ziemianie w dobrach Radziwiłłów (XVI-XVIII w.). Przegląd Historyczny, t.
LXXXIIP, z. 1, pp. 33-49.
Borawski, P., Dubioski, A. (1986). Tatarzy polscy. Dzieje, legendy, obrzędy, tradycje (pp. 270).
Warszawa: Iskry.
Czerwioski, G., Konopacki A. (2015). Estetyczne aspekty literatury polskich, białoruskich i litewskich
Tatarów (XVI-XXI w.) (pp. 348) Białystok: Alter Studio.
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
115
Drozd, A. (1999). Arabskie teksty liturgiczne w przekładzie na język polski XVII wieku (pp.
191).Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Akademickie Dialog.
Drozd, A. (1993). Chamaił Sobolewskiego. Rocznik Tatarów Polskich I, Gdaosk, pp. 48-62.
Drozd, A. (2004). Koran staropolski. Rozważania w związku z odkryciem tefsiru mioskiego z 1686
roku. Rocznik Biblioteki Narodowej XXXVI, Warszawa, pp. 237-248.
Drozd, A. (2000a). Na pograniczu piśmiennictwa i sztuki religijnej: muhiry Tatarów polsko-litewskich.
In. [w:] A. Drozd, M. M. Dziekan, T. Majda (Eds.), Katalog Zabytków Tatarskich. Piśmiennictwo i
muhiry Tatarów polsko-litewskich (pp. 84). Warszawa: Res Publica Multiethnica, pp. 38-43.
Drozd, A. (2000b). Piśmiennictwo Tatarów polsko-litewskich (XVI-XX w.). Zarys problematyki. In. A.
Drozd, M. M. Dziekan, T. Majda (Eds.), Katalog Zabytków Tatarskich. Piśmiennictwo i muhiry
Tatarów polsko-litewskich (pp. 84). Warszawa: Res Publica Multiethnica, pp. 12-37.
Drozd, A., Dziekan, M. M., Majda, T. (1999). Katalog Zabytków Tatarskich. Meczety i cmentarze
Tatarów polsko-litewskich (pp. 100). Warszawa: Res Publica Multiethnica.
Drozd, A., Dziekan, M. M., Majda, T. (2000). Katalog Zabytków Tatarskich. Piśmiennictwo i muhiry
Tatarów polsko-litewskich (pp. 84). Warszawa: Res Publica Multiethnica.
Dumin, S. (2006). Herbarz rodzin tatarskich Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego (pp. 185). Gdaosk:
Związek Tatarów RP.
Dumin, S. (1991). Szlachta tatarska w Wielkim Księstwie Litewskim i jej zmiany w sytuacji prawnej w
XVI-XVIII w. Rocznik Historyczny, LVII, pp. 147-163.
Dumin, S. (2013). Tradycje genealogiczne i legendy rodowe Tatarów litewskich. In. J. KulwickaKamioska, Cz. Łapicz (Eds.), Tatarzy Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego w historii, języku i kulturze
(pp. 339). Toruo: Towarzystwo Naukowe, pp. 61-89.
Dziadulewicz, S. (1986). Herbarz rodzin tatarskich (pp. 495). Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Artystyczne i
Filmowe.
Dziekan, M. M. (1998). Chamaił Aleksandrowicza. Rocznik tatarów Polskich, IV, pp. 27-43.
Dziekan, M. M. (2013). Chcąc znad i wiedzied, jak ciągnąd fał alk uranowy w „Chamaile
Aleksandrowicza”. In. J. Kulwicka-Kamioska, Cz. Łapicz (Eds.), Tatarzy Wielkiego Księstwa
Litewskiego w historii, języku i kulturze (pp. 339). Toruo: Towarzystwo Naukowe, pp. 125-133.
Dziekan, M. M. (2008). Czas święty i czas świecki w chamaile Aleksandrowicza: godziny i dni
niechsiowe. In. T. Bairaauskaite, H. Kobeckaite, G. Mikiniene (Eds.), Orientas Lietuvos
Didžiosios Kunigaiktijos Visuomenes Tradicijoje: Totoriai Ir Karaimai (pp. 368). Vilnius:
Universiteto Leidykla, pp. 81-89.
Dziekan, M. M. (2000). Magia i tradycje ludowe Tatarów polsko litewskich. In. A. Drozd, M. M.
Dziekan, T. Majda (Eds.), Katalog Zabytków Tatarskich. Piśmiennictwo i muhiry Tatarów polskolitewskich (pp. 84). Warszawa: Res Publica Multiethnica, pp. 44-47.
Fleischer, H. O., Delitzsch, F. (1838). Catalogus librorum manuscriptorum qui in Bibliotheca Senatoria
civitatis Libsiensis asservantur (pp. 676). Leipzig: Grimmae, J. M. Gebhart.
Grygajtis, K. (2003). Osadnictwo Tatarów hospodarskich w Wielkim Księstwie Litewskim XIV-XVIII w.
(pp. 280). Gdaosk: Związek tatarów Polskich.
Gutowski, J. (1997). Katalog Zabytków Tatarskich. Broo i uzbrojenie Tatarów (pp. 140). Warszawa:
Res Publica Multiethnica.
Warszawa, Gdaosk, Poland.
Kołodziejczyk, A. (1998). Cmentarze muzułmaoskie w Polsce (pp. 112). Warszawa: OOZK.
Kołodziejczyk, A. (1997). Rozprawy i studia z dziejów tatarów litewsko-polskich i islamu w Polsce w
XVII-XX wieku (pp. 218). Siedlce: IH WSRP.
Konopacki, A. (2015). Autorzy, kompilatorzy, kopiści – rzecz o rękopisach Tatarów Wielkiego
Księstwa Litewskiego. In. J. Kulwicka-Kamioska, Cz. Łapicz (Eds.), Tefsir Tatarów Wielkiego
Księstwa Litewskiego. Teoria i praktyka badawcza (pp. 318). Toruo: Wydział Filologiczny UMK, pp.
271-286.
Konopacki, A. (2006). Muzułmanie na ziemiach Rzeczypospolitej (pp. 108). Białystok: ELKAM.
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
116
Konopacki, A. (2010). Życie religijne Tatarów na ziemiach Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego w XVI-XIX
wieku (pp. 253). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.
Konopacki, M. (1966). Piśmiennictwo Tatarów polsko-litewskich w nauce polskiej i obcej. Przegląd
Orientalistyczny, 3 (59), pp. 193-204.
Kraczkowski, I. (1952). Nad arabskimi rękopisami. Kartki ze wspomnieo o księgach i ludziach (pp.
349). Warszawa: Paostwowe Wydawnictwo naukowe.
Kryczyoski, S. (1935). Bibliografia do historii Tatarów polskich (pp. 69). Zamośd: b. d.
Kryczyoski, S. (1997-1998). Kronika wojenna Tatarów litewskich (pp. 55). Gdaosk: Związek Tatarów
Polskich.
Kryczyoski, S. (2000). Tatarzy litewscy. Próba monografii historyczno-etnograficznej (pp. 278).
Gdaosk: Związek tatarów Polskich.
Kulwicka-Kamioska, J. (2014). Badania kitabistyczne w Polsce i na świecie. Życie Tatarskie, nr 39(116),
rok X (XXVIII), pp. 37-49.
Kulwicka-Kamioska, J. (2004). Kształtowanie się polskiej terminologii muzułmaoskiej. Na podstawie
piśmiennictwa religijnego Tatarów litewsko-polskich (pp. 209). Toruo: Towarzystwo Naukowe.
Kulwicka-Kamioska, J. (2013). Przekład terminologii religijnej islamu w polskich tłumaczeniach
Koranu na tle biblijnej tradycji translatorycznej (pp. 357).Toruo: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UMK.
Kulwicka-Kamioska, J., Łapicz, Cz. (2015). Tefsir Tatarów Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego. Teoria i
praktyka badawcza (pp. 318). Toruo: Wydział Filologiczny UMK.
Kulwicka-Kamioska, J., Łapicz, Cz. (2013). Tatarzy Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego w historii, języku i
kulturze (pp. 339).Toruo: Towarzystwo Naukowe.
Krzyżanowski, P., Miśkiewicz, A. A., Orłowska B. (2015), Tatarzy w Polsce po 1945 r. Muzułmaoska
tożsamośd wobec asymilacji (pp. 312). Gorzów Wlkp.: Paostwowa Wyższa Szkoła Zawodowa w
Gorzowie Wlkp.
Lewicka, M. (2015a). Identyfikacja i analiza tekstologiczno-filologiczna arabskiej warstwy językowej s.
478-485 Tefsiru z Olity (1723 r.). In. G. Czerwioski, A. Konopacki (Eds.), Estetyczne aspekty
literatury polskich, białoruskich i litewskich Tatarów (XVI-XXI w.) (pp. 348). Białystok: Alter Studio,
pp. 107-132.
Lewicka, M. (2015b). Kitabistics a new direction of the Islam studies in Poland (the literature
of Polish-Lithuanian tatars). In. R. Ghazali, M. R. Ismail, CW Shamsul Bahri CW Ahmad (Eds.), 2nd
International Conference on Arabic Studies & Islamic Civilization (pp. 1870), pp. 290-303.
Lewicka, M. (2015c). System arabskiej notacji i transliteracji. In. Cz. Łapicz, J. Kulwicka-Kamioska
(Eds.), Tefsir Tatarów Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego. Teoria i praktyka badawcza (pp. 318).
Toruo: Wydział Filologiczny UMK, pp. 101-138.
Lewicka, M. (2015d). Z badao nad piśmiennictwem Tatarów polsko-litewskich. Arabska warstwa
językowa Tefsiru z Olity (1723). In. A. Abbas, A. Maśko (Eds.), W kręgu zagadnieo świata
arabskiego (pp. 518). Poznao: UAM, pp. 417-433.
Lewicka, M., Kulwicka-Kamioska, J. (2012). Transformacja immanentną cechą przekładu
specjalistycznego – na podstawie polskiego tłumaczenia Koranu z 2. Połowy XVI wieku. Linguistica
Copernicana 2012, 2(8), pp. 65-75.
Łapicz, Cz. (2009). Chrześcijaosko-muzułmaoska interferencja religijna rękopisach Tatarów Wielkiego
Księstwa Litewskiego. In. Lietuvos Didžiosios Kunigaiktystes kalbos, kulturos ir ratijos tradicijos
(pp. 368). Vilnius: Universiteto Leidykla, pp. 293-310.
Łapicz, Cz. (1986a). Kitab Tatarów litewsko-polskich (paleografia, grafia, język) (pp. 236). Toruo:
Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika.
Łapicz, Cz. (2008). Kitabistyka a historia języka polskiego i białoruskiego. Wybrane zagadnienia.
Rocznik Slawistyczny LVII.
Łapicz, Cz. (1986b). Losy językowe Tatarów litewsko-polskich. Acta Universitatis Nicolai Copernici, z.
27.
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
117
Cz., Łapicz, J., Kulwicka-Kamioska (2015). Tefsir Tatarów Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego. Teoria i
praktyka
badawcza
(pp.
318).
Toruo:
Wydział
Filologiczny
UMK,
http://www.tefsir.umk.pl/pliki/Tefsir_Tatarow_WKL.pdf.
Łapicz, Cz. (2011), Z jakich źródeł muzułmanie Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego czerpali wiedzę o
religii chrześcijaoskiej. In. M. Lewicka, Cz. Łapicz (Eds.), Dialog chrześcijaosko-muzułmaoski.
Historia i współczesnośd, zagrożenia i wyzwania (pp. 240). Toruo: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UMK,
pp. 165-185.
Łapicz, Cz. (2005). Z zagadnieo przekładu muzułmaoskiej terminologii religijnej na język polski i
białoruski. In. A. Gadomski (Ed.), Krymsko-polskie zeszyty naukowe. Symferopol, pp. 165-179.
Łapicz, Cz., Jankowski, H. (2000). Klucz do raju. Księga Tatarów litewsko-polskich z XVIII wieku (pp.
256). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Akademickie Dialog.
Łapicz, Cz. (1991). Zawartośd treściowa kitabu Tatarów litewsko-polskich. Acta Baltico-Slavica, t. 20,
pp. 169-191.
Łowmiaoski, H. (1983). Studia nad dziejami Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego (pp. 579). Poznao:
Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.
Луцкевіч, I. (1920), Ай Китаб (З пасьмертнай спадчыны Iвана Луцкевіча. In. [в:] Наша Нива.
Зорник, Вильня, pp. 28-39.
Łyszczarz, M. (2013). Młode pokolenie polskich Tatarów (pp. 317). Olsztyn-Białystok: Uniwersytet
Warmiosko-Mazurski, Muzułmaoski Związek Religijny w RP.
Meredith-Owens, G. M., Nadson, A. (1970). The Byelorussian Tartars and their Writings. The Journal of
Byelorussian Studies II, nr 2 , pp. 141-176.
Miśkiewicz, A. A. (1993). Tatarska legenda. Tatarzy polscy 1945-1990 (pp. 131). Białystok: Krajowa
Agencja Wydawnicza.
Miśkiewicz, A. A. (2009). Tatarzy na Ziemiach Zachodnich Polski w latach 1945-2005 (pp. 216).
Gorzów Wielkopolski: Wojewódzka i Miejska Biblioteka Publiczna im. Z. Herberta.
Miśkiewicz, A. A. (1990). Tatarzy polscy 1918-1939. Życie społeczno-kulturalne i religijne (pp. 206).
Warszawa: Paostwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
Miśkiewicz, A. A., J. Kamocki (2004). Tatarzy słowiaoszczyzną obłaskawieni (pp. 224). Kraków:
Universitas.
Miszkiniene, G., Temczyn, S. (2013). O tekstologii rękopiśmiennych kitabów Tatarów litewskich:
Dialog proroka Muhammada z szejtanem. In. J. Kulwicka-Kamioska, Cz. Łapicz (Eds.), Tatarzy
Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego w historii, języku i kulturze (pp. 339). Toruo: Towarzystwo
Naukowe, pp. 211-230.
Мишкиниене, Г. (2008). Турецко-польский словарик из китаба Якуба Хасеневича (1840). In. T.
Bairašauskaitė, H. Kobeckaitė, G. Miškinienė (Eds.), Orientas Lietuvos Didžiosios Kunigaikštijos
Visuomenės Tradicijoje: Totoriai ir Karaimai (pp. 368). Vilnius: Universiteto Leidykla, pp. 105-121.
Мишкиниене, Г., Дургут, Х. (2009b) Легенда „Мирадж” из китаба Ивана Луцкевича. In. Sergej Ju
Temin, Lietuvos Didžiosios Kunigaikštystes kalbos, kultros ir raštijos tradicijos (pp. 447). Vilnius:
Lietuvi Kalbos Institutas, pp. 357-375.
Мишкиниене, Г., Намавичюте, С. (2009c). Китаб Ивана Луцкевича. Памятник народной
культуры литовских татар (pp. 799). Вильнюс: Lietuvi kalbos institutas.
Мишкинене, Г., Намавичюте, С., Покровская, Е. (2005). Каталог арабскоалфавитных
рукописей литовских татар (pp. 138). Вильнюс: Вильнюсский гос. ун-т им. В. Капсукаса.
Radziszewska, I. (2013). Praktyki magiczne w chamaiłach Tatarów Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego
(na podstawie tzw. fału Sulejmana). In. J. Kulwicka-Kamioska, Cz. Łapicz (Eds.), Tatarzy Wielkiego
Księstwa Litewskiego w historii, języku i kulturze (pp. 339). Toruo: Towarzystwo Naukowe, pp.
231-251.
Radziszewska, I. (2010). Chamaiły jako typ piśmiennictwa religijnego muzułmanów Wielkiego
Księstwa Litewskiego (na podstawie słowiaoskiej warstwy językowej) (pp. 343), unpublished
doctorate disertation, Toruo: Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika.
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
118
Sobczak, J. (1984). Położenie prawne ludności tatarskiej w Wielkim Księstwie Litewskim (pp. 133).
Warszawa-Poznao: Paostwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
Starastsina, V. (2013). Porównanie zawartości Kitabu Lebiedzia (z drugiej połowy XVIII w.) z
zawartością innych rękopisów Tatarów Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego. In. J. Kulwicka-Kamioska,
Cz. Łapicz (Eds.), Tatarzy Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego w historii, języku i kulturze (pp. 339).
Toruo: Towarzystwo Naukowe, pp. 253-274.
Suter, P. (2004). Alfurkan tatarski. Der litauisch-tatarische Koran-Tefsir (pp. 555). Kln: Bhlau.
Synkova, I. (2013). Magiczne teksty w rękopisach Tatarów WKL. In. J. Kulwicka-Kamioska, Cz. Łapicz
(Eds.), Tatarzy Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego w historii, języku i kulturze (pp. 339). Toruo:
Towarzystwo Naukowe, pp. 275-289.
Сынкова, І. (2008). Отражение антитринитарной полемики в литературе Татар Великого
княжества Литовского. In. T. Bairašauskaitė, H. Kobeckaitė, G. Miškinienė (Eds.), Orientas
Lietuvos Didžiosios Kunigaikštijos Visuomenės Tradicijoje: Totoriai ir Karaimai (pp. 368). Vilninius:
Universiteto Leidykla, pp. 223-232.
Szachno-Romanowicz, S. (1997). Planetne dualary Tatarów polskich (tatarskie teksty magicznoochronne w chamaile Aleksandrowicza). Rocznik Tatarów Polskich, IV, pp. 7-25.
Szynkiewicz, J. (1935a). Literatura religijna Tatarów litewskich i jej pochodzenie. Rocznik Tatarski, nr
2, pp. 138-143.
Szynkiewicz, J. (1932). O kitabie. Rocznik Tatarski, nr 1, pp. 188-194.
Talko-Hryncewicz, J. (1924). Muślimowie, czyli tak zwani Tatarzy Litewscy (pp. 126). Kraków-Dębniki:
Księgarnia Geograficzna „Orbis”.
Tarełka, M. (2013). Pskowski Koran z 1093/1682 r. Nowe informacje. In. J. Kulwicka-Kamioska, Cz.
Łapicz (Eds.), Tatarzy Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego w historii, języku i kulturze (pp. 339). Toruo:
Towarzystwo Naukowe, pp. 291-306.
Tyszkiewicz, J. (1989). Tatarzy na Litwie i w Polsce. Studia z dziejów XIII-XVIII w. (pp. 343). Warszawa:
Paostwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
Tyszkiewicz, J. (2008). Tatarzy w Polsce i Europie. Fragmenty dziejów (pp. 264). Pułtusk: Akademia
Humanistyczna im. A. Gieysztora.
Tyszkiewicz, J. (2002). Z historii Tatarów polskich 1794-1944. Zbiór szkiców z aneksami źródłowymi
(pp. 176). Pułtusk: Wyższa Szkoła Humanistyczna.
Warmioska, K. (1999). Tatarzy polscy – tożsamośd religijna i etniczna (pp. 238). Kraków: Towarzystwo
Autorów i Wydawców Prac Naukowych „Universitas”.
Woronowicz, A. (1935). Kitab tatarów litewskich i jego zawartośd. Rocznik Tatarski II, pp. 376-394.
Zajączkowski, A. (1951). Tak zwany chamaił tatarski ze zbiorów rękopisów w Warszawie.
Sprawozdania z Czynności i Posiedzeo PAU LII, nr 4, pp. 307-313.
Zakrzewski, A. B. (1989). O asymilacji Tatarów w Rzeczypospolitej w XVI-XVIII w. In. M. Bogucka (Ed.),
Tryumfy i porażki. Studia z dziejów kultury polskiej XVI-XVIII w. (pp. 258). Warszawa: Paostwowe
Wydawnictwo Naukowe, pp. 76-96.
Scholarly literature uses, often interchangeably, the following terms: “Polish and Lithuanian Tatars”,
“Polish-Lithuanian-Belarusian Tatars”, “Polish Tatars”, “Lithuanian Tatars”, “Belarusian Tatars”, “Tatars of
the Republic of Poland”, “Tatars of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania”. The author uses the last one, referring
to the descendants of the Golden Horde who reached the Baltic and Slavic lands in 14th century (in order
to emphasize the Turkish – Mongolian descent), due to the fact that the term “Tatar” seems to be not very
precise and is used to refer to various tribes, including Turkish-Mongolian tribes, nomads who came to
Middle Asia and Middle East, settlers in Russia and Crimea, members of the Golden Horde and Crimea
Khanate. The terms such as “Polish Tatars”, “Lithuanian Tatars”, “Belarusian Tatars”, based on the
geographic connotations, define the contemporary national affiliation. Bearing in mind the fact that the
i
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
119
subject of the author’s discussion is the literary heritage and cultural output of the descendants of its
citizens, the term Tatars of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (further: GDL) seems to be the most
appropriate.
ii
In the notation there is the definite article al- without vocalization marks which results from the phonetic
realization. The letter alif should be marked with wala occurring above the alif which lost hamza (this usually
occurs in the case of the definite article al-, where hamza is subject to ellision), letter lm is subject to
regressive assimilation consisting in its likening to the next sound (this always happens in case of the definite
article followed by the so called “letter of the sun”: t, , dl, l, r, z, sn, n, d, , ,
, lm, nn). Notation of this type (without wala) is not characteristic for the writing of the manuscript of
the Quran, however, it is quite often present in these texts.
iii
The long vowel  is marked by the scribe with a vocalization mark, so called ”short alif” and not a letter,
similar thing happens in the authentic Arabic texts.
iv
See: footnote 2.
v
See: footnote 3.
vi
See: footnote 2.
vii
As above.
viii
See: footnote 3.
ix
This notation features alif letter without vocalization marks, it should be marked with wala appearing
over the alif which lost hamza (this usually occurs in case of the definite article al-, where hamza is subject to
ellison). The notation of this type (without wala) is not characteristic for the writing of the manuscript of the
Quran, however, it is quite often present in these texts.
x
See: footnote 2.
xi
Wrong notation of the letter f in the place of the letter kf, wrong notation of the mark amma in the
place of mark fata abobe the letter mim and wrong notation of the mark adda over the letter lm. Correct
notation: al-kalma.
xii
No mark adda over the letter lm. Correct notation: ballaa.
xiii
See: footnote 9.
xiv
Wrong notation of the mark amma in the place of mark fata. Wrong using of plural in the place of
singular. Correct notation: al-karma.
xv
Wrong notation of the mark kasra in the place of mark amma, correct notation: rabbuna.
xvi
Wrong notation of the letter in the place of letter .
xvii
See: footnote 2.
xviii
As above.
xix
No hamza over ww letter.
xx
Wrong notation of the mark fata in the place of mark amma. Correct notation: rabbun.
xxi
See: footnote 9.
xxii
Two marks above the letter nn: sukn i fata.
xxiii
Wrong notation of the letter alif with fata in the place of the letter ww with amma. Correct notation:
tan.
xxiv
Notation of the long vowel in the final sound in the form of alif maqra following the vocalization
mark resembling the so called ”short alif”, but placed below the preceding letter (while the so called “short alif”
is placed above a letter). In Arabic authentic texts the long vowel is graphically realized in the form of the
letter y following the kasra, however in the Quran derived texts the letter yin the final sound is written in
the form of alif maqra.
xxv
See: footnote 16, correct notation ain. The letter alif features wala mark which takes place in the
old texts in relation to the letter alif preceding hamza.
xxvi
See: footnote 19.
xxvii
As above.
xxviii
As above.
xxix
Wrong notation, correct: tayri.
xxx
See: footnote 26.
xxxi
As above.
xxxii
Wrong notation of the letter tmafta in the place of letter tmarba, probably an interference
from Turkish and/or Persian featuring such a non-standard spelling.
xxxiii
See: footnote 19.
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
120
xxxiv
As above.
As above.
xxxvi
As above.
xxxvii
As above.
xxxviii
As above.
xxxix
As above.
xl
As above.
xli
As above.
xlii
See: footnote 2.
xliii
See: footnote 19.
xliv
As above.
xlv
As above.
xlvi
As above.
xlvii
As above.
xlviii
As above.
xlix
As above.
l
As above.
li
Specific way of connecting the letter ww with the letter tmarba, (they appear as connected, although
in accordance with joining principles of the Arabic letters, which cannot be joined on the left side). It seems that
it is not a wrong notation but a calligraphic manner of the scribe.
lii
See: footnote 19.
liii
As above.
liv
As above.
lv
See: footnote 19. Correct notation: fa-aktubuhu.
lvi
See: footnote 2.
lvii
See: footnote 9.
lviii
As above.
lix
As above.
lx
See: footnote 19, wrong notation of the mark kasra in the place of mark fata.
lxi
No mark above the letter alif, correct notation: fa-afir.
lxii
Wrong notation of the mark amma in the place of mark sukn above the letter h, correct notation: Y
rabbh!
lxiii
As above, correct notation: Ysayyidh!
lxiv
No mark above the letter alif, correct notation: wa-arzuqn.
lxv
See: footnote 9.
lxvi
See: footnote 19.
lxvii
See: footnote 9.
lxviii
See: footnote 2.
lxix
See: footnote 9.
lxx
See: footnote 16.
lxxi
See: footnote 2.
lxxii
See: footnote 32.
lxxiii
See: footnote 9.
lxxiv
See: footnote 32.
lxxv
See: footnote 9.
lxxvi
See: footnote 19.
lxxvii
See: footnote 2.
lxxviii
As above.
lxxix
See: footnote 32.
lxxx
See: footnote 2.
lxxxi
As above.
lxxxii
See: footnote 9.
lxxxiii
As above.
lxxxiv
As above.
lxxxv
Division of a word between two lines (does not occur in Arabic), interference from the Latin.
lxxxvi
See: footnote 19.
lxxxvii
See: footnote 9.
xxxv
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
121
lxxxviii
As above.
See: footnote 2.
xc
See: footnote 9.
xci
See: footnote 85.
xcii
See: footnote 9.
xciii
See: footnote 19.
xciv
See: footnote 3.
xcv
See: footnote 2.
xcvi
No long vowel after the letter nn.
xcvii
See: footnote 9.
xcviii
See: footnote 19.
xcix
See: footnote 2.
c
No marks hamza and fata above the letter alif and adda over the letter nn. Correct notation: waaskinn.
ci
See: footnote 24.
cii
See: footnote 9.
ciii
No mark above the letter alif, correct notation wa-arzuqn).
civ
Two marks above the letter r– fata and kasra.
cv
ir - bridge over hell, leading to the gates of paradise.
cvi
See: footnote. 2.
cvii
Long vowel was written with the letter ww, instead of alif, which occurs in several words borrowed
from aramaic. The letter ww is connected with the letter tmarba in a peculiar way, see: footnote 85.
cviii
See: footnote 2.
cix
See: footnote 19.
cx
As above.
cxi
See: footnote 2.
cxii
Wrong vocalisation, the mark fata above the letter r and no mark over the letter y. Correct
notation: al-ttawrati.
cxiii
See: footnote 9.
cxiv
See: footnote 19.
cxv
See: footnote 2.
cxvi
See: footnote 9.
cxvii
As above.
cxviii
Wrong notation of the mark amma in the place of mark kasra over the letter mm.
cxix
See: footnote 19.
cxx
Wrong vocalisation, correct notation: saalnka.
cxxi
See: footnote 24.
cxxii
See: footnote 2.
cxxiii
See: footnote 9.
cxxiv
Wrong notation of the mark fatha above the letter alif in the place of marks: hamza and kasra.
cxxv
See: footnote 9.
cxxvi
No long vowel after the letter r.
cxxvii
See: footnote 19.
cxxviii
See: footnote 9.
cxxix
See: footnote 19.
cxxx
As above.
cxxxi
See: footnote 2.
cxxxii
As above.
cxxxiii
See: footnote 19.
cxxxiv
See: footnote 24.
cxxxv
See: footnote 2.
cxxxvi
See: footnote 9.
cxxxvii
See: footnote 19, wrong notation of the mark amma in the place of mark fata. Correct notation:
arama.
cxxxviii
See: footnote 2.
cxxxix
See: footnote 19.
lxxxix
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
122
As above, wrong notation of the letter ayn in the place of letterayn, correct notation: anamn.
No mark above the letter alif, correct notation wa-arfan.
cxlii
See: footnote 9.
cxliii
As above.
cxliv
As above.
cxlv
See: footnote 32.
cxlvi
See: footnote 2.
cxlvii
See: footnote 9.
cxlviii
See: footnote 19.
cxlix
As above.
cl
See: footnote 2.
cli
See: footnote 9.
clii
See: footnote 19.
cliii
As above.
cliv
See: footnote 2.
clv
As above.
clvi
As above.
clvii
See: footnote 19.
clviii
See: footnote 9.
clix
Wrong notation above the letter alif mark called ”short alif” in the place of mark madda.
clx
See: footnote 19.
clxi
See: footnote 9.
clxii
See: footnote 19.
clxiii
See: footnote 9.
clxiv
As above.
clxv
Two marks with the letter nn: sukn and kasra.
clxvi
Letter alif features wala singn, which occurs in old texts in relation to the letter alif preceding hamza.
clxvii
See: footnote 2.
clxviii
See: footnote 9.
clxix
See: footnote 19, peculiar way of joining the letter r with the letter tmarba, see: footnote 51.
clxx
See: footnote 2.
clxxi
No mark above the letter alif, correct notation wa-aram.
clxxii
See: footnote 19.
clxxiii
See: footnote 2.
clxxiv
See: footnote 3.
clxxv
See: footnote 2.
clxxvi
See: footnote 19, wrong notation of the mark fata in the place of ”short alif”, correct notation:
allhumma.
clxxvii
Two marks with the letter lm: sukn i kasra.
clxxviii
See: footnote 9.
clxxix
Wrong notation of the mark kasra in the place of fata.
clxxx
Umma – Muslim community.
clxxxi
See: footnote 9.
clxxxii
Wrong notation of the long wovel  in the place of mark hamza above the letter ww, correct notation:
munisan.
clxxxiii
See: footnote 9.
clxxxiv
No mark hamza under the letter alif.
clxxxv
See: footnote 2.
clxxxvi
See: footnote 9.
clxxxvii
The letter alif is missing, correct notation: karmika.
clxxxviii
Wrong notation of the mark amma in the place of fata. No mark hamza above the letter alif.
clxxxix
See: footnote 9.
cxc
See: footnote 19.
cxci
As above.
cxcii
See: footnote 2.
cxciii
As above.
cxl
cxli
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
123
cxciv
See: footnote 19.
See: footnote 9.
cxcvi
See: footnote 2.
cxcvii
The letter yis missing, correct notation: al-nnrni.
cxcviii
See: footnote 9.
cxcix
See: footnote 16 and 19.
cc
See: footnote 9.
cci
Two marks with the letter tmarba: fata i kasra.
ccii
See: footnote 9.
cciii
No mark above the letter alif, correct notation wa-arfa.
cciv
See: footnote 9.
ccv
See: footnote 51.
ccvi
See: footnote 9.
ccvii
See: footnote 24.
ccviii
See: footnote 2.
ccix
See: footnote 19.
ccx
In the notation the letter alif without the vocalization mark, it should feature a prothetic vowel i
characteristic for the imperative of the verbs of this kind.
ccxi
See: footnote 9.
ccxii
See: footnote 51.
ccxiii
Wrong vocalisation, wrong notation of the mark fata in the place of kasra under the letter lm and the
mark kasra on the place of tanwn kasra in ultima, correct notation: kalimatin.
ccxiv
Wrong notation of the mark tanwn kasra in the place of tanwn fata in ultima, correct notation:
karmatan.
ccxv
See: footnote 32.
ccxvi
Wrong notation of the mark tanwn kasra in the place of tanwn fata in ultima, correct notation:
sadatan. Peculiar way of joining the letter dl with the letter tmarba, see: footnote 51.
ccxvii
See: footnote 51.
ccxviii
Wrong notation of the mark tanwn kasra in the place of tanwn fata in ultima, correct notation:
salmatan.
ccxix
See: footnote 2.
ccxx
See: footnote 19.
ccxxi
In the notation the letter alif without the vocalization mark, it should feature a prothetic vowel u
characteristic for the imperative of the verbs of this kind.
ccxxii
See: footnote 9.
ccxxiii
See: footnote 19.
ccxxiv
As above.
ccxxv
See: footnote 9.
ccxxvi
Wrong notation of the mark tanwn kasra in the place of tanwn fata in ultima, correct notation:
barakatan.
ccxxvii
A thirtieth part of the The Quran.
ccxxviii
See: footnote 2.
ccxxix
Wrong notation of the letter yin the place of b, correct notation: tawbatan.
ccxxx
See: footnote 2.
ccxxxi
See: footnote 9.
ccxxxii
As above.
ccxxxiii
As above.
ccxxxiv
Wrong notation of the letter alif in the place of ww with the mark fata, correct notation: ulwnan.
ccxxxv
See: footnote 2.
ccxxxvi
As above.
ccxxxvii
As above.
ccxxxviii
As above.
ccxxxix
As above.
ccxl
See: footnote 2.
ccxli
See: footnote 2.
ccxlii
As above.
cxcv
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
124
ccxliii
See: footnote 2.
See: footnote 51.
ccxlv
See: footnote 9.
ccxlvi
Wrong vocalisation, correct notation: afaran.
ccxlvii
See: footnote 9.
ccxlviii
As above.
ccxlix
As above.
ccl
As above.
ccli
See: footnote 32.
cclii
See: footnote 9.
ccliii
See: footnote 2.
ccliv
See: footnote 9.
cclv
See: footnote 2.
cclvi
See: footnote 9.
cclvii
The letter hshould be present here in the notation, ww should occur only after this letter.
cclviii
See: footnote 9.
cclix
See: footnote 2.
cclx
See: footnote 9.
cclxi
See: footnote 19.
cclxii
See: footnote 9.
cclxiii
See: footnote 2.
cclxiv
See: footnote 3.
cclxv
Wrong notation of the mark fata in the place of madda above the letter alif.
cclxvi
Wrong notation of the mark madda in the place of hamza above the letter alif.
cclxvii
See: footnote 2.
cclxviii
As above.
cclxix
As above.
cclxx
See: footnote 19.
cclxxi
Wrong notation, correct: li-ri.
cclxxii
See: footnote 2.
cclxxiii
See: footnote 2.
cclxxiv
See: footnote 19. Wrong notation with the article al-, correct notation li-arwi.
cclxxv
See: footnote 19. Peculiar way of joining the letter dl with the letter h, see: footnote 51.
cclxxvi
See: footnote 19.
cclxxvii
As above. Wrong notation with the article al-, correct notation li-abihi.
cclxxviii
Wrong notation of the mark fata in the place of amma above the letter nn.
cclxxix
See: footnote 2.
cclxxx
See: footnote 3.
cclxxxi
See: footnote 19.
cclxxxii
See: footnote 85.
cclxxxiii
See: footnote 19.
cclxxxiv
J.w. Wrong notation of the mark kasra in the place of fata above the letter mm.
cclxxxv
See: footnote 19.
cclxxxvi
See: footnote 16.
cclxxxvii
See: footnote 19.
cclxxxviii
J.w. Wrong notation of the letter dl in the place of l.
cclxxxix
See: footnote 16 i 32.
ccxc
See: footnote 19, wrong notation with the article al-, correct notation li-arwi.
ccxci
See: footnote 9.
ccxcii
As above.
ccxciii
See: footnote 32.
ccxciv
See: footnote 9.
ccxcv
As above.
ccxcvi
See: footnote 9.
ccxcvii
See: footnote 19.
ccxcviii
The letter alif is missing.
ccxliv
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
125
ccxcix
See: footnote 19.
See: footnote 9.
ccci
See: footnote 16.
cccii
See: footnote 9.
ccciii
As above.
ccciv
As above.
cccv
See: footnote 85.
cccvi
See: footnote 19, wrong notation of the mark amma in the place of fata above the letter mm, correct
notation: arama.
cccvii
See: footnote 2.
cccviii
As above.
cccix
See: footnote 19.
cccx
See: footnote 2.
cccxi
Wrong notation of the mark kasra in the place of fata above the letter nn.
cccxii
No mark above the letter alif,correct notation wa-azul.
cccxiii
See: footnote 9.
cccxiv
Wrong notation of the mark kasra in the place of fata above the letter b.
cccxv
See: footnote 9.
cccxvi
See: footnote 19, Wrong notation of the mark amma in the place of fata above the letter mm,
correct notation: arama.
cccxvii
See: footnote 2.
cccxviii
See: footnote 9.
cccxix
See: footnote 32.
cccxx
See: footnote 9.
cccxxi
As above.
cccxxii
As above.
cccxxiii
See: footnote 2.
cccxxiv
See: footnote 3.
cccxxv
See: footnote 2.
cccxxvi
See: footnote 3.
cccxxvii
See: footnote 2.
cccxxviii
See: footnote 19.
cccxxix
See: footnote 187.
cccxxx
See: footnote 19.
cccxxxi
As above.
cccxxxii
See: footnote 85.
cccxxxiii
Wrong notation of the mark hamza on the support bar in the form of the letter y, correct notation on
the support bar in the form of letter alif.
cccxxxiv
See: footnote 19.
cccxxxv
Wrong notation of the letter zin the place of rand the mark sukn in the place of fata above
the letter qf, correct notation tarzuqan.
cccxxxvi
See: footnote 19.
cccxxxvii
See: footnote 187.
cccxxxviii
See: footnote 19.
cccxxxix
As above.
cccxl
See: footnote 187.
cccxli
See: footnote 19.
cccxlii
As above, wrong notation of the mark hamza on the support bar in the form of the letter y, correct
notation on the support bar in the form of the letter alif.
cccxliii
See: footnote 19.
cccxliv
Wrong notation of the mark sukn in the place of fata above the letter qf, correct notation:
tafaan.
cccxlv
See: footnote 19.
cccxlvi
As above.
cccxlvii
See: footnote 187.
ccc
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
126
Wrong notation of the mark hamza on the support bar in the form of the letter y, correct notation
without the support bar.
cccxlix
See: footnote 2.
cccl
See: footnote 19.
cccli
As above, zwrong notation of the letter tmarba in the place of tmafta.
ccclii
See: footnote 19.
cccliii
See: footnote 187.
cccliv
See: footnote 19.
ccclv
As above, wrong notation of the mark hamza on the supprot bar in the form of the letter y, correct
notation on the support bar in the form of the letter alif.
ccclvi
See: footnote 19.
ccclvii
Wrong notation, correct: tuniyan. See: footnote 24.
ccclviii
See: footnote 2.
ccclix
See: footnote 24.
ccclx
See: footnote 9.
ccclxi
See: footnote 358.
ccclxii
See: footnote 187.
ccclxiii
See: footnote 19.
ccclxiv
See: footnote 2.
ccclxv
See: footnote 19.
ccclxvi
See: footnote 24.
ccclxvii
See: footnote 9.
ccclxviii
See: footnote 2.
ccclxix
See: footnote 19.
ccclxx
As above, see: footnote 85.
ccclxxi
See: footnote 16.
ccclxxii
Zob. przyp. 2.
ccclxxiii
Wrong notation with the article al-, correct notation: min ulumti.
ccclxxiv
See: footnote 9.
ccclxxv
See: footnote 19 and 24.
ccclxxvi
See: footnote 9.
ccclxxvii
As above.
ccclxxviii
Wrong notation, correct: bi-izzika.
ccclxxix
See: footnote 2.
ccclxxx
See: footnote 3.
ccclxxxi
Wrong notation of the mark fata in the place of madda above the letter alif.
ccclxxxii
See: footnote 19.
ccclxxxiii
See: footnote 3.
ccclxxxiv
See: footnote 9.
ccclxxxv
First of all, due to the accuracy (letters of the Latin alphabet are complemented with the additional
markings due to the variation of the Arabic sounds and each of them marks a single sound, while in the
”simplified” transcription one letter of the Latin alphabet can render a few Arabic sounds, and some of them are
not included in the notation, which in the layer of the articulation implicates the hindrance in pronunciation and
disturbance of the communication and in the layer of notation precludes the reversal of the process, retransliteration, that is the return to the original text) but also bearing in mind the international character and
conformance to the other Arabic elaborations.
ccclxxxvi
Short vowels (a, u, i) are sporadically marked in texts requiring this action (for didactic and correction
purposes) with the aid of special vocalization marks (serving to note the short vowels, but also the lack of a
vowel or doubling of a consonant), placed above or below a letter.
cccxlviii
e-Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Arabic Studies and Islamic Civilization
ICASIC2016 (e-ISBN 978-967-0792-08-8). 14-15 March 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Organized by http://WorldConferences.net
127