New to Islam and have questions.

I think I'm living proof that the words, in any language, are a miracle in itself. I instantly recognized it as truth. No other research needed, etc. It was clear.

Abu Dawood, who said: A man came to the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and said: I cannot memorise anything of the Qur’an; teach me of it what will be sufficient for me. He said: “Say: ‘Subhaan Allah, wa’l-hamdu Lillah, wa laa ilaaha ill-Allah, wa Allahu akbar, wa laa hawla wa quwwata illa Billah (Glory be to Allah, praise be to Allah, there is no god but Allah, Allah is most great, and there is no power and no strength except with Allah).’” The man said: This is for Allah; what is there for me? He said: “Say: ‘Allahumm aghfir li, wa’rhamni, wa’rzuqni, wa’hdini, wa ‘aafini (O Allah, forgive me, have mercy on me, grant me provision, guide me and pardon me).’”

THREAD
The Tafsir literature is a treasure trove of evidence-based interpretations, often multiple for a single verse or phrase.

Qur’an translations are generally an assertion of one reading, and translators rarely explain their choices.
Multiple possibilities arise at the level of individual words, then grammatical structures, sentence syntax and so on. For an insight, see this article which also shows how and why translations differ:

quranica.com/divergence-in-translations/

When you depend upon a translation, you are deprived of the richness of Quranic meanings and the variety of views expressed by scholars in Arabic tafsirs. You might use a site like Islamawakened.com to compare multiple translations—good idea, but there’s still a problem...
To explain: suppose one ayah has been understood linguistically in three ways which we’ll call A, B and C.

A is the most obvious but the others are plausible and accepted by scholars—some argued that B is best, or C.
When you scan through the translations, you might find all 3 represented. The wording might differ slightly, but most are based on reading it as A: even if many translators didn’t consult tafsirs. Others gathered round B, and still others, C.
Or we may find A and B represented, but C is absent. Why? It wasn’t any one translator’s job to go with C, but isn’t it unfair that it’s overlooked in aaallllllll those translations?! And maybe some people really need to find C explained and translated.
We may even find that they all went with A. But why? Because it’s the apparent meaning, or because they lacked interest in the others and might not read tafsir anyway. And maybe, just maybe, they sometimes copy each other (😮).
And even though it’s unlikely that Apparent A will be missed, it’s definitely possible that a Dubious D will pop up in some translations: something that doesn’t find support in the exegetical literature. It might still be right.. but don’t you deserve to know that it’s novel?
These are knotty problems that I’m raising and seeking to address through a postdoctoral proposal currently under consideration.

In the meantime, shop around and take care out there! 😇
Translating tafsir is one kind of solution:

t.co/gIdGmQ1Ufx

Question: So does this in anyway give credence to those who say (non arab) laymen should not try to understand Quran through translations or learning basic Arabic as that is "dangerous". They say one should only recite the arabic and any understanding is only via 'tafsir' classes.

Shaikh's reply:

Not at all. Partial understanding is better than no understanding. Any good translation is giving you one correct reading of the text. Many tafsir classes will also stick to just one!

However, I'm also sure that there are millions more that have simply memorized the surrahs and have either forgotten the meaning of them or never learned the meaning of it in the first place.

To say that rote memorization of words is more important than the deeper meaning and understanding of what you're saying, does not sound worthy of praising Allah ta'ala.

In my opinion it is much more important that when I praise Allah ta'ala that he knows it is from my heart and that I know what I'm saying.