Which is the Real Quran?
-
Peace Sabo,
Tell me, what is your take on the following...
- 29 Suras are initialed
- 29 Suras do not have the word 'Allah' in them.
The total = 58
However, the two set's are interlocked by Sura 68 (which is both initialed, and does not have the word 'Allah' in it) making the total of Suras 57...
Exactly half of the Scripture.
i.e. Half is interlocked, Half is similar.
Praise be to God!!!!
I was always wondering and asking why 29 suras initialed. And why 29 suras don't have the word "Allah" inside them. This is a very good observation indeed and if it shows something to me, then it shows that this scripture is amazing either by structure or by contents.
I am sorry for those who consider this as "number worship". If they had the statistical knowledge to understand the significance of these structures they wouldn't have said that. Studying the structure of the starts for example doesn't mean that one is a "stars worshipper".
Thanks Layth for sharing this observation and maybe there is something more behind that.
if you see my post about the structure of the Quran, you will see now that the picture is being more clear
57 suras homogenous verify here
their total sum is 6234
57 suras heterogenous verify here their total sum is 6555additionally what is amazing is
the sum of sura numbers in the homogenous section = 3303 = the sum of verse numbers in the heterogenous section!!! (who understands statistics will know how small is the probability that this number is just obtained by a roll of dice, i.e. luck)Best regards,
sabo -
I really didn't like this article much. First of all it focuses
too much on the differences between Hafs/Warsh. Ok, yes,
these are not identical versions; but even academical non-muslims
researchers acknowledge that these characteristics have more
or less no implications for the final understanding.
One should also not refer to anti-islamic propaganda sites to
prove otherwise.Beside, writing was invented as an aid to store the oral
saying for reading/communicating/transferring for others/
in the future. Even in english today we have differences
depending upon the culture/society you are expressing
yourself to, such as "color" or "colour", "are" or "r" etc.
The hafs/warsh differences are not identical but follow
the same analogy.
Who decides the "official" writing ? Today, in some countries
this is decided by agencies appointed by governments, however
1000+ years ago there were no such central authorities.Using large amount of energy on such minor details is therefore
quite pointless. (Unless you of course need to satisfy some
other structure, such as a mathematical based on, but before
you can do that, you need to prove that such a structure exist,
which to me still remains an open issue. Otherwise, by fixing
text one can always create a pattern by hand.) -
Salaamun alaikum,
This is a very interesting thread. So far, not once have we seen Al-Qur'aan itself tell us on how to decide which is the true version. I wonder what value we really give Al-Qur'aan if we prefer words of historians and muhaditheen and artificial multiples over the principles which Al-Qur'aan itself sets for us ?
thanks and peace.
-
Peace everyone,
Using large amount of energy on such minor details is therefore
quite pointless. (Unless you of course need to satisfy some
other structure, such as a mathematical based on, but before
you can do that, you need to prove that such a structure exist,
which to me still remains an open issue. Otherwise, by fixing
text one can always create a pattern by hand.)
Bravo! And welcome to the forum.So far, not once have we seen Al-Qur'aan itself tell us on how to decide which is the true version.
Good point. I was trying to go even further than that, but was unsuccessful... I guess when I'm ready, I'll start another thread. -
Salaamun alaikum Zenje,
Good point. I was trying to go even further than that, but was unsuccessful... I guess when I'm ready, I'll start another thread.
To my mind, this 'historical' approach business has no Quranic basis. I think the approach of 'finding', i.e everyone finds Al-Qur'aan for himself, whether in a bookshop, through a friend or whatever, this is right approach to take. Al-Qur'aan must be a guide to understanding ur world and urself, rather than have a historical background which is subject to manipulation.
-
Peace
Practicaly, there isnt any difference between hafs and warsh versions if we take into consideration their consonants` basis, that is the text without vowel and consonant markers....toward my study its only one word difference...and it makes no significant change in meaning ...
5724 ?allahu alghaniy ul hameed? and ?allahu huwa al ghaniy ul hameed?
Literal translation goes
"The God is self-sufficient and the praised/praiseworthy" and "The God He is self-sufficient and the praised/praiseworthy"
So basically we have the same text throughout the world.....and ambiguity and plenty of possible readings should not bewilder one who truly believes...cause even doted(consonant markers) and vocalised text have a lot of ambiguity and offer a lot of alternative understandings...
The dots and vocalisation differences between hafs and warsh are truly minor issues...They are mainly a kind of difference in dialects(color/colour, my friend/friend of mine, more rich/richer) and amount quantitatively and qualitatively not even to 1% of differences between alternative, gramaticaly valid translations/understandings that offers each of the versions by itself....
So the real issue and challenge is the correct understanding and/or translations of the both ....and more particularly of the text without consonant and vowel markers...i think its sensible to read from the consonant`s basis( to insert consonant and wowel markers freely) as long as we take into account the context and congruence of the message...(as pointed by mq if i havent misuderstood him)
toward my best knowledge the vowel and consonant markers were not yet invented in the time of revelation... and the first scripts were without them... even today we have such scripts....there are on the net as well i think... if together with these, today we have 7 different recitations(orally transmited) and 2 differently vowelised texts why shouldnt we read from the basis that is imo common to all of them...
Tomorrow some may prove otherwise or find some obscure completely vocalised and doted script dating to the alleged time of revelation that was lying hidden somewhere in some museum or wherever i would never preffered such a script over a consistent and sensible reading/message from the bare text without consonant and vowel markers...
Context and consistency of the message should be the main criteria... not the oldest script method.... that truly resembles to the chain of the narrators method....and can be very subjective..even if scientifically proved....Science, is sometimes very subjective and it takes ages to discover the innappropriateness of its tools and methodology....i am not believing in the book beacuse of this or that person have transmited it to me or because of its age, but because of its message.....
Context and consistency are the very same natural criterias used by humans in understanding of any text because all writings contain some ambiguity...this is a natural principle of any language...
best wishes
Zlatan
p.s.
here s a link to an analysis of some of hafs-warsh differences
http//www.inet.ba/~hardy/differences.htm
-
I did stop visiting Free minds forum because of the arrogant attitute of rejecting everything which is old. I am very much against Rashad Al Khalifah messengership and his faulty code 19 which is very much praised on this forum. The majority of the members belong to cult 19 including Layth who I believe is the Administrator.
Layth intentions might be sincere but sure he is heading towards the path of creating more fitna among muslims.
-
I did stop visiting Free minds forum because of the arrogant attitute of rejecting everything which is old. I am very much against Rashad Al Khalifah messengership and his faulty code 19 which is very much praised on this forum. The majority of the members belong to cult 19 including Layth who I believe is the Administrator.
Layth intentions might be sincere but sure he is heading towards the path of creating more fitna among muslims.
I wholeheartedly agree...though i am not sure of the majority claim...
Layth is extremely worried about the minute differences of the variants while in the same time he is rejecting The God`s bold and glaring messages that are essential and contained in all these variants....
He is so much worried about the nuances and he wont stop until he found all the dots and letters of the reading that have come out directly from the Muhamad`s mouth....but he wont listen to the voice of the MESSAGE....
best wishes
-
Peace all
I am just now reading Layth`s article on hafs and warsh differences and couldnt help but to copy and paste something that testifies to the faith he professes
I quote
- Verse Count Differences.
By far this is the most serious and overlooked of the differences between the Hafs and Warsh versions affecting over 43% of the chapters in the Quran.
end of quote
the man can not stand the count of the verses to differ regardless of the fact that all the same verses are there and its only that separation points between the verses are placed differently.
best wishes
-
I did stop visiting Free minds forum because of the arrogant attitute of rejecting everything which is old. I am very much against Rashad Al Khalifah messengership and his faulty code 19 which is very much praised on this forum. The majority of the members belong to cult 19 including Layth who I believe is the Administrator.
Layth intentions might be sincere but sure he is heading towards the path of creating more fitna among muslims.
Peace,
Pardon me sir but I am not a believer of any code 19 nor have I ever been. Nor do I follow or worship any Rashad Khalifa.
To say the majority of the members of this forum follow him (Khalifa) or code 19 is a gross error.
I don't see many people praising Khalifa OR code 19 on here so I don't get why you have come to this unfair conclusion.I'm neither a sheep nor a parrot, just a mere follower of Quran and Quran only.
)
-
Salaamun alaikum,
Zlatanracticaly, there isnt any difference between hafs and warsh versions if we take into consideration their consonants` basis, that is the text without vowel and consonant markers....toward my study its only one word difference...and it makes no significant change in meaning ...
5724 allahu alghaniy ul hameed and allahu huwa al ghaniy ul hameed
I would disagree. Every word in al-qur'aan has a point to it. 'Huwa' to Arab GRAMMARIANS may not be so important, but to metaphysicians, it's a signifier about the 'being' (huwa is literally 'he IS') of Allah.
What strikes me as strange is the unwillingness to get AL-QURAAN to speak for itself. Did Allah overlook the need to say which is His scripture ?
I don't think so.
thanks and peace.
-
peace be upon you KGB,
I am very much against Rashad Al Khalifah messengership and his faulty code 19 which is very much praised on this forum. The majority of the members belong to cult 19 including Layth who I believe is the Administrator.
I have no idea what you're talking about, there are only like 3 or 4 people on here that follow the code 19
-
Hi,
It is a difficult trap to avoid, the more you study, the more you want details to fall into place, and you may get caught up in certain ideas.
However, the code 19 may, or may not, be a mathematical code from God.
The message does not change, and it never will. If the 19-code can help some people put a deeper trust in the Qur?an, so be it. Just try to avoid making 19 an idol to worship.The various versions of the Qur?an, all give us the same message. Also in English we may have the same message given in different ways, even with different words etc. And we may have two different messages delivered using the same words.
The main thing, therefore, is to try to understand the underlying reason for the message, and the goal that the sender is trying to reach.
Try not to loose sight of the goal through overemphasizing the means.Best regds
Ali Omar
-
Peace to every one here for me the discussion about whicih version is right is useless even though there r differences but i don,t think so the differences r very big n its not against the over all message of Quran i think whicih is God alone for me if there is code 19 exist or not doesn,t really matter because i belive Quran i belive its from God n i will continue to follow Quran in the mean time if some want research the code or some want to research that whicih version is right i,m not against that its ok with me peace
-
Peace Zaltan,
Practicaly, there isnt any difference between hafs and warsh versions if we take into consideration their consonants` basis, that is the text without vowel and consonant markers....toward my study its only one word difference...and it makes no significant change in meaning ...
I could not help but recall the following verse when reading your statement on this subject
"And from mankind are those who argue regarding God with no knowledge nor guidance nor enlightening Scripture." (22
Not only do you obviously not know this subject, but the aggressiveness with which you approach and attack it is quite interesting.
Layth is extremely worried about the minute differences of the variants while in the same time he is rejecting The God`s bold and glaring messages that are essential and contained in all these variants....
I suppose if you have no problem speaking about the Scripture without knoweldge, then you would also have no problem speaking about my beliefs without knowledge.
He is so much worried about the nuances and he wont stop until he found all the dots and letters of the reading that have come out directly from the Muhamad`s mouth....but he wont listen to the voice of the MESSAGE....
What voice of the message? The one that said the following
"And do not uphold what you have no knowledge of. For the hearing, eyesight, and mind, all these you are responsible for. " (1736)
Which is of is upholding without knowledge? Without verification?
I am just now reading Layth`s article on hafs and warsh differences and couldnt help but to copy and paste something that testifies to the faith he professes
You are suppose to read on a subject before you argue it, not after.
And after you now read, did you have the moral obligation to retract your statement about the differences being insignificant?
No, you jumped in for what you thought would be a kill
I quote
- Verse Count Differences.
By far this is the most serious and overlooked of the differences between the Hafs and Warsh versions affecting over 43% of the chapters in the Quran.
end of quote
the man can not stand the count of the verses to differ regardless of the fact that all the same verses are there and its only that separation points between the verses are placed differently.
Who cares about authenticity when we can all live in la-la land where differences are not differences and where research on such a subject is treated as taboo?
I care that God's enemies have managed to infiltrate the very text we thought was secure...I care to expose these people for what they have done, and to attempt to substantiate and identify the damage done (no matter how big or small).
If you can live with the knowledge of such people altering God's revealtions, then you need to ask yourself if you are any better than they are.
"So woe to those who write the Scripture with their hands then Say ?This is from God,? so that they can seek a cheap gain! Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they gained. " (279)
-
Salaamun alaikum Layth,
I care that God's enemies have managed to infiltrate the very text we thought was secure...I care to expose these people for what they have done, and to attempt to substantiate and identify the damage done (no matter how big or small).
In my opinion, you should care about what God's book tells you about determining which is God's book. Relying on historical texts will bring you the same results as those who did the same, Sunnis and Shias. Of course, that's your right and I respect your position.
thanks and peace.
-
Peace MQ,
In my opinion, you should care about what God's book tells you about determining which is God's book. Relying on historical texts will bring you the same results as those who did the same, Sunnis and Shias. Of course, that's your right and I respect your position.
I have already determined through the article that historical reliability alone will lead to a mish-mash of findings (so we are not in dispute on this matter).
With regards to all the variations/meanings, I have mentioned that following the 'best' of each is the most reasonable approach to take (I also do not think we are in dispute on this).
The only factor where we may not be in agreement is the mathematical aspect of the verification...This for me only helps 'point out' what may be a human error, but in no way is it on its own conclusive.
RK fell into this when he tried to force the Scripture to adhere to certain 19 counts which he knew must be there...I have found that the same tool helps determine where a problem may lie, without giving the solution in any forced mannor (i.e. do we treat the Basmalla as Hafs does in 11 or as Warsh does?...With the 'tool' of 19 we can see that Warsh is more correct in this aspect)
Some general comments I would like to make (not addressed to anyone in particlualr)
Most of the paranoia about 19 is caused by poeple not being aware how such a tool may be used and thinking they have to start re-writing the text as was done with 'NWN' or with 9128&129.
From my study, the fault lies in ignorance...Not in the tool itself.
Just looking at the denial on the exisitence of significant differences between the 10 versions of the Quran (I am not even counting RK's or any other non-Sunni versions floating around out there) shows what type of honesty levels we are dealing with here.
The Scripture is not and never has been God...If we were to remove it entirely from existence then God would continue to exists and would continue to be the King/Lord of the Worlds...People here need to ask if they have made the Scripture as God and forgotton the true Lord of heavens and earth to whom we give all submission and to whom not a leaf falls ecxcept with His knowledge...
