
The '''Qur'an''' ( ''al-qur'ān''; its literal meaning is "the recitation" and is often called "Al Qur'ān Al Karīm": "The Noble Qur'an" or "The Glorious Qur'ān," also Transliteration as Quran, Koran, and less commonly Alcoran) is the Sacred text of Islam. Muslims believe that the Qur'an is the literal word of God and the culmination of God's revelation to mankind, revealed to the Prophet Muhammad over a period of 23 years by the Angel Jibreel (Gabriel). == Format of the Qur'an == The Qur'an consists of 114 (number) suras (chapters) with a total of 6,236 ayat (verses; the exact number of ayat is disputed, not due to content dispute but due to different methods of counting; the sect founded by Rashad Khalifa claims the exact number is 6,346). Muslims usually refer to the suras not by their numbers, but by an Arabic name derived in some way from the sura. (See sura.) The suras are not arranged in chronological order (in the order in which Islamic scholars believe they were revealed) but in a different order, roughly by size, also believed by Muslims to be divinely inspired. After a short opening, the Qur'an proceeds to the longest sura, and closes with some of the shortest ones. == The Qur'an as divided for reading and recitation == In addition to and largely independent of the division into suras, there are various ways of dividing the Qur'an into parts of approximately equal length for convenience in reading, reciting and memorizing. The seven manzil (stations) and the thirty juz' (parts) can be used to work through the entire Qur’an in a week or a month, one manzil or one juz' a day, respectively. A juz' is sometimes further divided into two hizb (groups), and each hizb is in turn subdivided into four quarters. A different structure is provided by the ruku'at, semantical units resembling paragraphs and comprising roughly ten ayat each. == The language of the Qur'an == The Qur'an is one of the first written works in Arabic. It is written in an early form of classical Arabic language termed in English “Quranic” Arabic. There are few other examples of Arabic from that time. (The ''Mu'allaqat'', or ''Suspended Odes'', are believed by some to be examples of pre-Islamic Arabic; others say that they were created after Muhammad. Only five pre-Islamic Arabic inscriptions survive.) Soon after Muhammad's death in 632 CE, Islam burst out of Arabia and conquered much of what was then the “civilized” world. Arab rulers had millions of foreign subjects, with whom they had to communicate. The language rapidly changed in response to this new situation, losing complexities of case and obscure vocabulary. Several generations after the prophet's death, many words used in the Qur'an had become opaque to ordinary sedentary Arabic-speakers, as Arabic had changed so much, so rapidly. The Bedouin speech changed at a considerably slower rate, however, and early Arabic lexicographers came to seek out Bedouin to explain difficult words or elucidate points of grammar. Partly in response to the religious need to explain the Qur'an to poorer speakers, Arabic grammar and lexicography soon became important sciences, and the model for the literary language remains to this day the speech used in Qur'anic times, rather than the current spoken dialects. Muslims contend that the Qur'an is remarkable for its poetry and grace, and that its very literary perfection is proof of its divine origin. Since this perfection is apparent only to those who speak Arabic, only the original Arabic text is considered the ''real'' Qur’an. Translations are considered mere glosses. The traditions governing the translation and publication of the Qur'an state that when the book is published, it must never simply be entitled "The Qur'an." The title must always include a defining adjective (avoiding conceivable confusion with other "recitations", in the Arabic sense), which is why all available editions of the Qur'an are titled ''The Glorious Qur'an, The Noble Qur'an,'' and other similar titles. Every reputable Islamic scholar should be able to read and understand the Qur'an in its original form. Many Muslims who do not otherwise understand Arabic memorize the whole text in Arabic, considering that they are closer to God in doing so. == Stylistic attributes == The Qur'an mixes narrative, exhortation, and legal prescription. The suras frequently combine all these modes, not always in ways that seem sensible or obvious to the non-Muslim reader. There are many repeated epithets (e.g. "Lord of the heavens and the earth"), sentences ("And when We said unto the angels: Prostrate yourselves before Adam, they fell prostrate, all save Iblis"), and even stories (such as the story of Adam) in the Qur'an. Muslim scholars explain these repetitions as emphasizing and pointing up different aspects of important themes. The Qur'an is partly rhymed, partly prose. Traditionally, the Arabic grammarians consider the Qur'an to be a genre unique unto itself, neither poetry (defined as speech with metre and rhyme) nor prose (defined as normal speech or rhymed but non-metrical speech, saj'.) The Qur'an often, although by no means always, uses loose rhyme between successive verses; for instance, at the beginning of surat al-Fajr: : Wal-fajr(i), : Wa layâlin `ashr(in), : Wash-shaf`i wal-watr(i) : Wal-layli 'idhâ yasr(î), : Hal fî dhâlika qasamun li-dhî ḥijr(in). or, to give a less loose example, the whole of surat al-Fil: : 'A-lam tara kayfa fa`ala rabbuka bi-'aṣḥâbi l-fîl(i), : 'A-lam yaj`al kaydahum fî taḍlîl(in) : Wa-'arsala `alayhim ṭayran 'abâbîl(a) : Tarmîhim bi-ḥijâratin min sijjîl(in) : Fa-ja`alahum ka-`aṣfin ma'kûl(in). Note that verse-final vowels are unpronounced when the verses are enunciated separately, a regular pausal phenomenon in classical Arabic language. In these cases, ''î'' and ''û'' often rhyme, and there is some scope for variation in syllable-final consonants. Some suras also include a refrain repeated every few verses, for instance ar-Rahman ("Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny?") and al-Mursalat ("Woe unto the repudiators on that day!") Islamic scholars divide the verses of the Qur'an into those revealed at Mecca (Makka), and those revealed at Medina (Madina) after the Hijra. In general, the earlier Makkan suras tend to have shorter verses than the later Madinan suras, with legal verses being particularly long. Contrast the Makkan verses above with a verse such as al-Baqara 229: : ''Divorce must be pronounced twice and then (a woman) must be retained in honour or released in kindness. And it is not lawful for you that ye take from women aught of that which ye have given them; except (in the case) when both fear that they may not be able to keep within the limits (imposed by) Allah. And if ye fear that they may not be able to keep the limits of Allah, in that case it is no sin for either of them if the woman ransom herself. These are the limits (imposed by) Allah. Transgress them not. For whoso transgresseth Allah's limits: such are wrong-doers.'' Similarly, the Madinan suras tend to be longer, including the longest sura of the Qur'an, al-Baqara. == The beginnings of the suras == Every chapter but one is preceded by the words ''basmala'', "In the Name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate". 29 suras begin with letters taken from a restricted subset of the Arabic alphabet; thus, for instance, surat Maryam (sura) begins "Kaf. Ha. Ya. 'Ain. Sad. A mention of the mercy of thy Lord unto His servant Zachariah." While there has been some speculation on the meaning of these letters, the consensus of Muslim scholars is that these letters' full meaning is beyond our understanding. However, they have observed that in all but 4 of the 29 cases, these letters are almost immediately followed by mention of the Qur'anic revelation itself. Western scholars' efforts have been tentative; one proposal, for instance, was that they were initials or monograms of the scribes that had originally written the sura down. See Qur'anic initial letters for a fuller discussion. == The temporal order of Quranic verses == Belief in the Qur'an's direct, uncorrupted divine origin is considered fundamental to Islam by most Muslims. This of course entails believing that the Qur'an has neither errors nor inconsistencies. : "This is the book in which there is no doubt, a guide to the believers": Surat al-Baqarah, verse 2.) However, there are instances where some verses presuppose that a given practice is allowed, while others forbid it. These are interpreted by Muslims in the light of the relative chronology of the verses: since the Qur'an was revealed over a course of 23 years, many verses were clarified or abrogated by later verses. Muslim commentators explain that this is because Muhammad was directed to gradually lead his small band of believers towards the straight path, rather than reveal the full rigor of the law at once. For example, the prohibition of alcohol was accomplished gradually rather than immediately. The earliest verse tells the believers to "Approach not prayers with a mind befogged, until ye can understand all that ye say, ..." (4:43), a prohibition of drunkenness but not alcohol. Later verses expanded prohibition to all alcohol consumption: "They ask thee concerning wine and gambling, say: "In them is great sin, and some profit, for men; but the sin is greater than the profit..."(2:219). In addition, there are cases where most Muslim scholars accept the doctrine of ''abrogation'' (''naskh''), whereby verses revealed later sometimes supersede verses received earlier. Which verses abrogate which others, if any, is, however, a controversial matter. == Quranic material found in other sacred texts == The Qur'an retells stories of many of the people and events recounted in Judaism and Christianity sacred books (Torah, Bible) and devotional literature (Apocrypha, Midrash), although it differs in many details. Well-known Biblical characters such as Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and John the Baptist are mentioned in the Qur'an as Prophets of Islam. (For a complete list, see Similarities between the Bible and the Qur'an). Muslims account for differences between Quranic versions and Christian or Jewish texts by saying that the Christian and Jewish texts have been corrupted, and that only the Qur'an preserves the correct version. == Origin and development of the Qur'an == This is a topic of some delicacy, since Islamic scholars proceed with the assumption that the Qur'an is a divine and uncorrupted text, while scholars in the Western secular tradition start with the notion that the Qur'an is a human production to be explained without reference to the supernatural. === According to Islamic scholars === Muhammad, according to tradition, could neither read nor write, but would simply recite what was revealed to him for his companions to write down and memorize. Adherents to Islam hold that the wording of the Qur'anic text available today corresponds exactly to that revealed to Muhammad himself: words of God delivered to Muhammad through Jibreel (Gabriel). According to some Muslim traditions, the companions of Muhammad began recording suras in writing before Muhammad died in 632; written copies of various suras during his lifetime are frequently alluded to in the traditions. For instance, in the story of the conversion of Umar ibn al-Khattab (when Muhammad was still at Mecca), his sister is said to have been reading a text of sura Ta-Ha. At Medina, about sixty-five sahaba are said to have acted as scribes for him at one time or another; the prophet would regularly call upon them to write down revelations immediately after they came. One tradition has it that the first complete compilation of the Qur'an was made during the rule of the first caliph, Abu Bakr. Zayd ibn Thabit, who had been one of Muhammad's secretaries, "gathered the Qur'an from various parchments and pieces of bone, and from the chests (i.e. the memories) of men." This compilation was kept by Hafsa bint Umar, one of Muhammad's widows, as well as the daughter of Umar, the second caliph. During the caliphate of Uthman ibn Affan, there were disputes about the recitation of the Qur'an. In response, Uthman decided to codify, standardize, and write down the text. Uthman is said to have commissioned a committee (including Zayd and several prominent members of Quraysh) to produce a standard copy of the text. Some accounts say that this compilation was based on the text kept by Hafsa. Other stories say that Uthman made his compilation independently, Hafsa's text was brought forward, and the two texts were found to coincide perfectly. Still other accounts omit any reference to Hafsa. Some Muslim scholars say that if the Qur'an had been collected by the order of a caliph, it would never have been relegated to the status of a keepsake for one of the prophet's widows. Possibly the story was invented to move the time of collection closer to Muhammad's death. [[Image:AndalusQuran.JPG|thumb|right|280px|12th century Andalusian Qur'an]] When the compilation was finished, sometime between 650 and 656 CE, Uthman sent out copies of it to the various corners of the Islamic empire. He ordered the destruction of all copies that differed from it. Several manuscripts, including the Samarkand manuscript, are claimed to the original copies sent out by Uthman [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Mss/]; however, many scholars, Western and Islamic, doubt that any of the Uthmanic originals remain. What were the different copies that were destroyed? Islamic traditions say that Abdallah Ibn Masud, Ubay Ibn Ka'b, and Ali ibn Abi Talib, Muhammad's son-in-law, had preserved versions that differed in some ways from the Uthmanic text that is now accepted by all Muslims. Muslim scholars record certain of the differences between the versions; those recorded consist almost entirely of orthographical and lexical variants, or different verse counts. All three (Ibn Masud, Ubay Ibn Ka'b, and Ali) are recorded as having accepted the Uthmanic text as authoritative. Uthman's version was written in an older Arabic script that left out most vowel markings; thus the script could be interpreted and read in various ways. This basic Uthmanic script is called the rasm; it is the basis of several traditions of oral recitation, differing in minor points. In order to fix these oral recitations and prevent any mistakes, scribes and scholars began annotating the Uthmanic rasm with various diacritical marks -- dots and the like -- indicating how the word was to be pronounced. It is believed that this process of annotation began around 700 CE, soon after Uthman's compilation, and finished by approximately 900 CE. The Quran text most widely used today is based on the Hafs tradition of recitation, as approved by the eminent Al-Azhar University in Cairo in 1922. (For more information regarding traditions of recitations, see ''Quranic recitation'', below.) === According to secular scholars === There is no one theory of Quranic origins that is accepted by all Western-style or secular scholars. Many scholars have accepted something like the traditional Muslim version. They believe that Muhammad put forth verses and laws that he claimed to be of divine origin; that his followers memorized or wrote down his revelations; that numerous versions of these revelations circulated after his death in 632 CE, and that Uthman ordered the collection and ordering of this mass of material in the time period (650-656) described by the Islamic scholars. These Western scholars point to many characteristics of the Qur'an -- the repetitions, the arbitrary ordering, the mixture of styles and genres -- as indicative of a human collection process that was extremely respectful of the original sources. There has been no evident organizing and harmonizing of the text. These scholars account for the many similarities between the Qur'an and the Jewish and Hebrew scriptures by saying that Muhammad was teaching what he believed a universal history, as he had heard it from the Jews and Christians he had encountered in Arabia and on his travels. Differences between the Qur'an and the Judeo-Christian scriptures can usually be explained by Muhammad's reliance on folk traditions rather than the actual text of the scriptures. There have been many studies of Muhammad's sources in the Jewish Mishnah, Gemara, and Midrash, and the Christian Apocrypha. This, of course, directly contradicts the Islamic teaching that it is the Judeo-Christian texts that are corrupt. Western scholars also dispute the Islamic belief that the whole of the Qur'an is addressed by God to humankind. They note that there are numerous passages where God is directly addressed, or mentioned in the third person, or where the narrator swears by various entities, including God. : "Some asked what need there was for God to take oaths like any mortal being, as when he swears by the fig and olive, and by Mount Sinai (95:1); by the declining day (103:1); and by the stars, the night and the dawn (81:15-18). Above all, they asked why the Almighty had to swear on himself ..." (Walker, cited in ''Foundations of Islam'', Peter Owen, 1998 p. 156) Western scholars have also been bold enough to point out obscurities in the text, claiming that Muslim commentators have invented explanations rather than admit that they don't know what a word means. Some Western scholars have been actively trying to interpret these obscure words by reference to languages that Muhammad might have encountered, such as Aramaic and Syriac, and from which he might have adopted words not then found in Arabic. Some scholars have tried to resolve obscurities by positing textual corruption, and advancing plausible replacements -- which is, of course, anathema in Muslim eyes. Muslims believe that the Qur'an is complete, perfect, and uncorrupted. Some Western scholars are less willing to attribute the entire Qur'an to Muhammad. They argue that there is no real proof that the text of the Qur'an was collected under Uthman, since the earliest surviving copies of the complete Qur'an are centuries later than Uthman. (The oldest existing copy of the full text is from the ninth century [http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/features/quran/index.shtml].) They see Islam as being formed slowly, over the centuries after the Muslim conquests, as the Islamic conquerors elaborated their beliefs in response to Jewish and Christian challenges. One influential proponent of this point of view was Dr. John Wansbrough, an English academic. Wansbrough wrote in a dense, complex, almost hermetic style, and he has had much more influence on Islamic studies through his students, Michael Cook and Patricia Crone than he has through his own writings. In 1977 Crone and Cook published a book called ''Hagarism'', which argued that, : ''The Qur'an is strikingly lacking in overall structure, frequently obscure and inconsequential in both language and content, perfunctory in its linking of disparate materials, and given to the repetition of whole passages in variant versions. On this basis it can plausibly be argued that the book is the product of belated and imperfect editing of materials from a plurality of traditions.'' (Patricia Crone and Michael Cook, ''Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World'', Cambridge, 1977, p. 18.) ''Hagarism'' was extremely controversial at the time, as it challenged not only Muslim orthodoxy, but the prevailing attitudes among secular Islamicists. Crone and Cook have since retreated from their extreme claims that the Qur'an evolved over several centuries, but they still believe that the Sunni scholarly tradition is extremely unreliable, as it projects current Sunni orthodoxy onto the past -- much as if New Testament scholars were dedicated to proving that Jesus was a Presbyterian or a Methodist. Fred Donner has argued against Crone and Cook, and for an early date for the collection of the Qur'an, based on his reading of the text itself. He points out that if the Qur'an had been collected over the tumultuous early centuries of Islam, with their vast conquests and bloody squabbles between rivals for the caliphate, there would have been some evidence of this history in the text. However, there is nothing in the Qur'an that does not reflect what is known of the earliest Muslim community. (''Narratives of Islamic Origins: The Beginnings of Islamic Historical Writing'', Donner, Darwin Press, 1998, p. 60.) Recent archaeological finds have also shed some light on the origins of the Qur'an. In 1972, during the restoration of the Great Mosque of San'a, in Yemen, laborers stumbled upon a "paper grave" containing tens of thousands of fragments of parchment on which verses of the Qur'an were written. (Qur'ans were and still are disposed thus, so as to avoid the impiety of treating the sacred text like ordinary garbage.) Some of these fragments were the oldest Quranic texts yet found [http://www.derafsh-kaviyani.com/english/quran1.html]. The European scholar Gerd-R. Puin has studied these fragments and published not only a corpus of texts, but some preliminary findings. Interestingly enough, the variations from the received text that he did find seemed to match variations reported by Islamic scholars, in their descriptions of the variant Qur'ans once held by Abdallah Ibn Masud, Ubay Ibn Ka'b, and Ali ibn Abi Talib, and suppressed by Uthman's order. ("Observations on Early Qur'an Manuscripts in San'a", Puin, in ''The Qur'an as Text'', ed. Wild, Brill, 1996) == Interpretation of the Qur'an == Even the clearest sacred scripture seems to attract learned commentary. The Qur'an has sparked a huge body of commentary and explication. As discussed earlier, later Muslims did not always understand the Qur'an's Arabic, they did not catch allusions that were clear to early Muslims, and they were extremely concerned to reconcile apparent contradictions and conflicts in the Qur'an. Commentators glossed the Arabic, explained the allusions, and perhaps most importantly, decided which Quranic verses had been revealed early in Muhammad's prophetic career, as being appropriate to the very earliest Muslim community, and which had been revealed later, canceling out or ''abrogating'' the earlier text. Memories of the ''occasion of revelation'', the circumstances under which Muhammad had spoken as he did, were also collected, as they were believed to explain some apparent obscurities. For all these reasons, it was extremely important for commentators to explain how the Qur'an was revealed -- when and under what circumstances. Much commentary, or tafsir, was dedicated to history. The early tafsir are some of the best sources for Islamic history. Famous commentators include at-Tabari, az-Zamakhshari, at-Tirmidhi, and Ibn Kathir. (These classic commentaries usually include all common and accepted interpretations; modern fundamentalist commentaries like that written by Sayyed Qutb tend to advance only one of the possible interpretations.) Commentators feel fairly sure of the exact circumstances prompting some verses, such as surat Iqra, or many parts, including ayat 190-194, of surat al-Baqarah). In other cases (eg surat al-Asr), the most that can be said is which city the Prophet was living in at the time (dividing between Makkan sura and Madinan suras.) In some cases, such as surat al-Kawthar, the details of the circumstances are disputed, with different traditions giving different accounts. The most important external aid used in interpreting the meanings of the Qur'an is the hadith — the collection of traditions upon which Muslim scholars (the ulema) based Islamic history and law. Scholars sifted the many thousands of hadith, trying to discover which were true and which were fabrications. One method, extensively used, was a study of the chain of narrators, the isnad, by which the tradition had been passed. Note that, while certain hadith — the hadith qudsi — are claimed to record noncanonical words spoken by God to Muhammad, or the gist of them, Muslims do not consider these to form any part of the Qur'an. == 'Created' vs. 'uncreated' Qur'an == The most widespread varieties of Muslim theology consider the Qur'an to be eternal and 'uncreated'. Such an approach echoes Greek philosophy, especially Plato's theories that all ultimate realities and truths had to be eternal and unchanging. Given that Muslims believe that Biblical figures such as Moses and Jesus all preached Islam, the doctrine of an unchanging, uncreated revelation implies that contradictions between their statements according to the Qur'an and the Bible must be the result of human corruption of the earlier divine revelations. However, some, notably including the Mu'tazili and Ismaili sects, dispute this doctrine of the uncreated Qur'an. Various liberal movements within Islam implicitly or explicitly question the doctrine of the uncreated Qur'an when they address questions related to the application of Islamic law; some contemporary Muslim thinkers, such as Reza Aslan, have argued that such laws were created by God to meet the particular needs and circumstances of Muhammad's community. Among the many reasons the dissenting voices have offered for their critique of the doctrine of an eternal Qur'an has been its implications to the doctrine of tawhid, or unity of God. Holding that the Qur'an is the eternal uncreated speech of Allah, speech that has always existed alongside Him, seemed to some thinkers to be a step in the direction of a more plural concept of God's nature (which could lead to what Muslims consider the sin of ''Shirk (idolatry)'', the association of something with God). Concerned that this interpretation appeared to echo the Christian conception of God's eternal Word or logos, some Muslim philosophers and theologians rejected the notion of the Qur'an's eternality. == Qur'an recitation == The very word ''Qur'an'' is usually translated as "recital," indicating that it cannot exist as a mere text. It has always been transmitted orally as well as textually. To even be able to perform salat (prayer), a mandatory obligation in Islam, a Muslim is required to learn at least some suras of the Qur'an (typically starting with the first sura, al-Fatiha, known as the "seven oft-repeated verses," and then moving on to the shorter ones at the end). A person whose recital repertoire encompasses the whole Qur'an is called a qari' (قَارٍئ) or hafiz (which translate as "reciter" or "memorizer," respectively). Muhammad is regarded as the first hafiz. Cantillation (''tilawa'' تلاوة) of the Qur'an is a fine art in the Muslim world. ===Schools of recitation === There are several schools of Quranic recitation, all of which are permissible pronunciations of the Uthmanic rasm. Today ten canonical recitations of the Qur'an and four uncanonical exist. For a recitation to be canonical it must conform to three conditions: # It must match the rasm, letter for letter. # It must conform with the syntactic rules of the Arabic language. # It must have a continuous isnad to Prophet Muhammad through ''tawatur'', meaning that it has to be related by a large group of people to another down the isnad chain. Ibn Mujahid documented seven such recitations and Ibn Al-Jazri added three. They are: # Nafi` of Madina (169/785), transmitted by Warsh and Qaloon # Ibn Kathir (recitor) of Makka (120/737), transmitted by Al-Bazzi and Qonbul # Ibn `Amer of Damascus (118/736), transmitted by Hisham (narrator) and Ibn Zakwan # Abu `Amr of Basra (148/770), transmitted by Al-Duri and Al-Soosi # `Asim of Kufa (127/744), transmitted by Sho`bah and Hafs # Hamza (recitor) of Kufa (156/772), transmitted by Khalaf and Khallad # Al-Kisa'i of Kufa (189/804), transmitted by Abul-Harith and Al-Duri # Abu-Ja`far of Madina, transmitted by Ibn Wardan and Ibn Jammaz # Ya`qoob of Yemen, transmitted by Ruways and Rawh # Khalaf of Kufa, transmitted by Ishaaq (narrator) and Idris (narrator) These recitations differ in the vocalization (''tashkil'' تشكيل) of a few words, which in turn gives a complementary meaning to the word in question according to the rules of Arabic grammar. For example, the vocalization of a verb can change its active and passive voice. It can also change its Arabic_grammar#Verb formation, implying intensity for example. Vowels may be elongated or shortened, and glottal stops (hamzas) may be added or dropped, according to the respective rules of the particular recitation. For example, the name of archangel Gabriel is pronounced differently in different recitations: Jibrīl, Jabrīl, Jibra'īl, and Jibra'il. The name "Qur'ān" is pronounced without the glottal stop (as "Qurān") in one recitation, and prophet Abraham's name is pronounced Ibrāhām in another. The more widely used narrations are those of Hafs (حفص عن عاصم), Warsh (ورش عن نافع), Qaloon (قالون عن نافع) and Al-Duri through Abu `Amr (الدوري عن أبي عمرو). Muslims firmly believe that all canonical recitations were recited by the Prophet himself, citing the respective isnad chain of narration, and accept them as valid for worshipping and as a reference for rules of Sharia. The uncanonical recitations are called "explanatory" for their role in giving a different perspective for a given verse or ayah. Today several dozen persons hold the title "Memorizer of the Ten Recitations," considered to be the ultimate honour in the sciences of Qur'an. == The Qur'an and Islamic culture == Before touching a copy of the Qur'an, or mushaf, a Muslim performs wudu (ablution or a ritual cleansing with water) This is based on tradition and a literal interpretation of sura 56:77-79: "Most surely it is an honored Qur'an, in a book that is protected; none shall touch it save the purified ones." '''Qur'an desecration''' means insulting the Qur'an by defiling or dismembering it. Muslims must always treat the book with reverence, and are forbidden, for instance, to pulp, recycle, or simply discard worn-out copies of the text. (Such books must be respectfully burned or buried.) [http://www.ourdialogue.com/q4.htm] Respect for the written text of the Qur'an is an important element of religious faith by many Muslims. They believe that intentionally insulting the Qur'an is a form of blasphemy. According to the laws of some Muslim countries, blasphemy is punishable by lengthy imprisonment or even the death penalty. * See also: Qur'an desecration by US military == Writing and printing the Qur'an == Most Muslims today use printed versions of the Qur'an. There are Qur'ans for all tastes and pocketbooks, many in bi-lingual forms with the Arabic on one side and a gloss into a more familiar language on the other. Before printing was widely adopted, the Qur'an was transmitted by copyists and calligraphers. Since Muslim tradition felt that directly portraying sacred figures and events might lead to idolatry, it was forbidden to decorate the Qur'an with pictures (as was often done for Christian texts, for example). Muslims instead lavished love and care upon the sacred text itself. Arabic is written in many scripts, some of which are both complex and beautiful. Arabic calligraphy is a highly honored art, much like Chinese calligraphy. Muslims also decorated their Qur'ans with abstract figures (arabesques), colored inks, and gold leaf. Pages from some of these beautiful antique Qur'ans are displayed throughout this article. == Translation of the Qur'an == The Qur'an has been translated into many languages, but translations of the Qur'an from Arabic language to other languages are not considered by Muslims to be actual copies of the Qur'an, but rather are considered to be ''interpretive translations'' of the Qur'an; they are thus not given much weight in debates upon the Qur'an's meaning. In addition, as mere interpretive translations of the Qur'an, they are treated as ordinary books instead of being accorded the privileged status of ''Holy Books'' requiring special care. Robert of Ketton was the first to translate the Qur'an into Latin, in 1143. == See also == * Qur'an reading * Allah * Hadith * Hafiz * Islam * Muhammad * Sura == Literature == * A. J. Arberry, ''The Koran Interpreted'', Touchstone Books, 1996. ISBN 0684825074 * M. M. Al-Azami, ''The History of the Qur'anic Text from Revelation to Compilation'', UK Islamic Academy: Leicester 2003. * Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari, ''Jami al-bayan `an ta'wil al-Qur'an'', Cairo 1955-1969, transl. J. Cooper (ed.), ''The Commentary on the Qur'an'', Oxford University Press, 1987. ISBN 0199201420 * Ibn Warraq (ed.), ''The Origins of the Koran'', Prometheus Books, 1998. ISBN 157392198X * J. D. McAuliffe (ed.), ''Encyclopaedia of the Qur'an'', Brill, 2002-2004. * Fazlur Rahman, ''Major Themes in the Qur'an'', Bibliotheca Islamica, 1989. ISBN 0882970461 * Robinson, Neal, ''Discovering the Qur'an'', Georgetown University Press, 2002. ISBN 1589010248 * W. M. Watt and R. Bell, ''Introduction to the Qur'an'', Edinburgh University Press, 2001. ISBN 0748605975 * Jane Dammen McAuliffe, ''Quranic Christians : An Analysis of Classical and Modern Exegesis'', Cambridge University Press, 1991. ISBN 0521364701 *Barbara Freyer Stowasser, ''Women in the Qur'an, Traditions, and Interpretation'', Oxford University Press; Reprint edition (June 1, 1996), ISBN 0195111486 * Helmut Gatje, Alford T. Welch, ''The Qur'an and Its Exegesis'', Oneworld Publications; New Ed edition (November 1, 1996). ISBN 1851681183 *Hanna E. Kassis, ''A Concordance of the Qur'an,'' University of California Press (March 1, 1984), ISBN 0520043278 ==External links== ===Translations=== *[http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/ The Noble Qur'an] — three translations (Yusuf Ali, Shakir, and Picthal). Also, Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi's chapter introductions to the Qur'an *[http://www.thenoblequran.com The Noble Qur'an] — Translated by Dr.Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al Hilali, and Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan. A well-known English translation endorsed by the Saudi government. Includes Arabic commentary by Ibn Katheer, Tabari, and Qurtubi. * [http://www.submission.org/Q-T.html The Final Testament] — Translation by Rashad Khalifa, considered heretic and an apostate by the main corpus of Muslims. * [http://www.islamicity.com/multimedia/radio/ch152/default.asp?inc=1.htm Qur'anic Recitation with English Translation by Qari Muhammad Ayub, Spoken in English by J.D. Hall] *[http://www.tolueislam.com/Parwez/expo/exposition.htm Exposition of the Holy Qur'an] — by G. A. Parwez *[http://www.qaiu.org/archives/quran/the_qxp_project/index.html The Qur'an As It Explains Itself] — by The QXP Project == References == ===Search=== * [http://www.islamicity.com/QuranSearch/ Qur'an Search] Search English, Turkish, French, Spanish, Malay, German * [http://www.al-quran.org.uk/ The Qur'an Browser] * [http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/searchquran.html Qur'an Database] * [http://www.qurancomplex.org/ King Fahd Complex For The Printing Of The Holy Qur'an] (in Arabic, English, French, Urdu, Spanish, Indonesian and Hausa) === Tafsir (Commentary) === * [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Tafseer/Ulum/ Overview of Tafsir] * [http://www.tafsir.com/ Tafsir] by Ibn Kathir * [http://www.geocities.com/masad02/ The Message of the Qur'an] Translated and Explained by Muhammad Asad * [http://www.al-islam.org/al-mizan/v1/ Tafsir Al-Mizan by Allamah Tabatabai] * [http://www.tafheemulquran.org Tafheem-ul-Quran] by [http://www.abulala.com/shortbio.asp Maula Maududi] * [http://www.geocities.com/atif_nazir_2000/quran.xml Quran in XML] === Ulm (Qur'anic studies) === * [http://www.ymofmd.com/books/uaq/index.htm Ulum al Qur'an] by Ahmad von Denffer * [http://www.netnavigate.com/hasan/studyquran/ Ilm ul Qur'an] — by Hasanuddin Ahmad * [http://www.emuslim.com/Quran/Lughat.asp The Easy Dictionary of the Qur'an] Compiled By Shaikh AbdulKarim Parekh * [http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/M_four_term/index.html Four Basic Quranic Terms] by [http://www.abulala.com/shortbio.asp Maula Maududi] *[http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/KM_W2Q/index.htm Way To The Quran] by [http://www.youngmuslims.ca/biographies/display.asp?ID=11 Khurrum Murad] ===Audio/Video=== * [http://www.aswatalislam.net/CategorySelectionMadeP.aspx?CatID=1001 Complete Qur'an recitations by 271 different reciters] * [http://www.aswatalislam.net/CategorySelectionMadeP.aspx?CatID=1005 Four videos of recitation, commentary, or prayer] *[http://www.shaplus.com/free-quran-software/quran-mp3-software/QuranReciter/quran-mp3.htm Quran recitation MP3 files], for use in [http://www.shaplus.com/free-quran-software/quran-mp3-software/QuranReciter/quranreciter-free-download.htm recitation software] (Windows executable) ===Supporting views regarding Islamic traditions and the Qur'an=== *[http://members.aol.com/silence004/ Koran and Nature's Testimony] Articles and Books by Muhammad Asadi. * [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ Examining The Qur'an] Original articles responding to textual criticism. * [http://www.quranicstudies.com/ The Qur'anic Studies] *[http://www.ymofmd.com/books/tbqs/ The Bible, the Qur'an and Science] by Dr. Maurice Bucaille *[http://islamicity.com/Video/ch21_7B.ram Is the Qur'an the Word of God?] A video debate between Muslim/Christian apologists *[http://islamicity.com/Video/ch21_6B.ram The Authenticity of the Qur'an] A video debate between Muslim/Christian apologists *[http://www.el-haqq.com/Free_E-books/whowrote.pdf Who Wrote the Qur'an?] Analysis of the various theories from an Islamic viewpoint. *[http://www.irf.net/irf/download/index.htm Free Books on Various Topics and Deabtes] Verbatim Scripts of Dr. Zakir Naik's Lectures And Debates *[http://www.understanding-islam.com/related/text.asp?type=rarticle&raid=296&sscatid=66 Approaching Qur'an and Sunnah - Classical, Traditional and Progressive Methodologies] ===Skeptical views of Islamic traditions and the Qur'an=== * [http://answering-islam.org/Quran/Text/ Textual Variants of the Qur'an] *[http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/index.html The Skeptic's Annotated Qur'an] — a version of the Qur'an annotated from a skeptical point of view. *[http://www.rim.org/muslim/qurancrit.htm Radical New Views of Islam and the Origins of the Koran] *[http://www.secularislam.org/research/origins.htm The Origins of the Koran] ===Western academic discussion of the origins of the Qur'an=== *[http://www.truthnet.org/Islam/Watt/ W. M. Watt´s "Bell´s Introduction to the Qur'an" (online version)] *[http://syrcom.cua.edu/Hugoye/Vol6No1/HV6N1PRPhenixHorn.html Die syro-aramaeische Lesart des Koran; Ein Beitrag zur Entschlüsselung der Qur?ansprache] Review of Christoph Luxenberg's book * [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/luxreview2.html Die syro-aramäische Lesart des Koran: Ein Beitrag zur Entschlüsselung der Koransprache] Another Review by François de Blois, Journal of Qur'anic Studies, 2003, Volume V, Issue 1 *[http://theatlantic.com/issues/99jan/koran.htm What is the Koran?] The Atlantic Online ===Qur'anic manuscripts and calligraphy=== * [http://faculty.washington.edu/wheelerb/quran/quran_index.html Qur'an Manuscripts] * [http://www.qurancomplex.org/OldQuranImages/Default.asp?l=eng&CatLang=1&TabID=6&SubItemID=2&SecOrder=6&SubSecOrder=1 Qur'an Complex, Pictures of Manuscripts] *[http://www.islamicarchitecture.org/art/islamic-calligraphy.html Islamic Calligraphy] Quran bs:Kur'an fa:قرآن ms:Al-Quran simple:Qur'an su:Qur'an
Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page. Previous discussions: *Talk:Qur'an/Archive01: :1 Selected Quotes from the Qur'an || 2 Standardisation of the copies of the Qur'an || 3 Mathematical Miracles || 4 Contemporary Scholarship and the Qur'an || 5 Article not neutral || 6 Number of Verses in the Qur'an || 7 Qur'an graveyards || 8 Article not neutral at all || 9 Qur'an Usage || 10 Hafiz || 11 Sacred || 12 Arabic name || 13 Wikisource || 14 Suras || 15 PBUH || 16 Apologetic || 17 Samrkand Manuscript || 18 Created and UnCreated Debated || 9 Stylistic features || 20 Fairly minor edits || 21 Deuteronomy & John refs early in article || 22 Uncreated Qur'an (deletion of passage related to Bible) || 23 Added this link || 24 External links again || 25 Is that rearrangement OK? || 26 Removed commercial link || 27 I deleted a picture || 28 Ibn Kathir || 29 parts and subdivisions || 30 Recent additions to external links || 31 Textual criticism and the Qur'an - Clarification after removal || 32 Mary is not a prophet of Islam || 33 Can a Muslim editor check the Islamic links? || 34 Quran slavery Please add new sections and talk threads to the bottom of this page. ---- __TOC__ == Quran, Koran == Hi, I just replaced all of the references in articles (that weren't direct quotations) to "Koran" with references to "Qur'an". There are, however, a ton of articles that speak of the "Quran" without the "'". Does anyone think it matters to change them? And if so would people be willing to each do, say, 10 articles? [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Whatlinkshere&target=Quran Whatlinkshere&target=Quran] --User:Jacobolus 11:48, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC) : Nevermind. I switched them all --User:Jacobolus User_talk:jacobolus 03:36, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC) :Does anyone know why ''Koran'' is now the less-preferred spelling? Since it's a transliteration from a non-Roman alphabet, how does it matter? Is it something about being more phonetically closer? --User:JimWae 09:05, 2005 Mar 29 (UTC) ::I think the ' in Qur'an might represent a sound not shown in Koran? Is it Ayn? I forget :/ I moved that page to Slavery in the Qur'an since that is proper naming conventions and I am going to look through it since it seems... well, suspect. User:Grenavitar 20:42, 17 May 2005 (UTC) Actually it's NOT the preferred spelling - not in the general English-speaking world. The word ''Koran'' is a perfectly good alternative. It's in fact more often used and more easily recognized by the general public, which is after all the audience for this encyclopedia. I hope this isn't going to degenerate into another one of those "if you aren't one of us, you can't talk about us things" - ushered in via a name controversy. Try to transcend your own narrow grouping and think of a larger social unit than your own, can't ya? User:Ed Poor user talk:Ed Poor 22:53, May 24, 2005 (UTC) :Aw, Ed... it's a question of register (linguistics). The BBC uses "Koran" in its news reports and "Qur'an" in its background documents. The Britannica, in its scholarly encyclopaedic articles, uses Qur'ān. Us here, hamstrung by character set issues and walking a narrow line, well, we use Qur'an. ([http://www.thedigitalcourier.com/articles/2005/05/24/news/news01.txt These guys], of course, are using their 1st amendment rights.) User:Hajor 00:02, 25 May 2005 (UTC) == "Entitites and events ... confirmed by science..." == Re: ::Some Muslims claim that the Quran contains much information about entities and events that has been confirmed by science and technology many years after the Qur'an was revealed, and take this to constitute further evidence that the Qur'an is indeed the true, eternal word of God. ... though I most powerfully and potently believe, I hold it not Wikipedia to have it thus set down. Hard to imagine defending a description along these lines of any other religious text, and I foresee a series of editorial conflicts on the impossible-to-resolve-objectively question of whether this sentence is justified by specific Qur'anic passages, and if so, which ones. Waste of time, and certainly such predictive passages, as remarkable as they are, are are not central to Islamic theology. (Placement of this passage in the article, however, suggests to the contrary.) May I vote for deletion? User:BrandonYusufToropov 14:35, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC) == Qur'an appearance == The page should have something about how the Quran looks on the outside and how/why it is highly decorated == Qur'an desecration == I put SectNPOV because what schools of Islamic law state this? We cannot just say "Islamic law says" is this Shia (which major imams)? Sunni (which major madhhabs? and if you could cite sources that say this. We cannot just get away with saying "Islamic law says" and we do that far too often. User:Grenavitar 20:35, 17 May 2005 (UTC) :No argument from me; I just wanted to consolidate all the Guantánamo material into one single article. I'm looking forward to seeing the experts come in and clear the point up. User:Hajor 20:55, 17 May 2005 (UTC) :Clearer now (see below), yes? I'm removing SectNPOV. User:BrandonYusufToropov 00:13, 18 May 2005 (UTC) === Rulings on handling Qur'an === http://www.geocities.com/~abdulwahid/muslimarticles/adaab_quran.html http://www.themodernreligion.com/basic/quran/etiquette.html http://www.sunnah.org/msaec/articles/respecting_quran.htm Use of derogatory remarks, etc; in respect of the Holy Prophet. Whoever by words, either spoken or written or by visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine. — Pakistan Penal code: Offenses relating to religion: Section: 295-C === DISRESPECT TO THE NOBLE QUR'AN === Hadhrat Úmar (Radhiallaahu Anhu) narrates that Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) said, 'Allah exalts many people by means of this book (Qur'an) and He also degrades and disgraces many others by means of the same.' (Muslim) Hadhrat Jaabir (Radhiallaahu Anhu) reports that Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) said, 'The Qur'an is such an interceder whose intercession is accepted, and a disputant whose dispute is upheld. Whoever keeps it in front of him, it draws him to Jannat, and whoever puts it behind his back, it hurls him into Jahannam.' In the light of the above Ahaadith, we learn that the position of the Noble Qur'an is exceptionally high by Allah Ta'aala. Therefore, it is essentially important for Muslims to show full respect, love and devotion for the Noble Qur'an. Insha Allah, in doing so Allah Ta'aala will elevate us in this world and in the Hereafter. It is mentioned that once a person who was a great sinner had found a piece of paper on the floor on which an Aayaat of the Qur'an Majeed was written. He picked it up and showed respect to it. Allah Ta'aala was so pleased with this act in showing respect to His words that Allah Ta'aala forgave him. Unfortunately, today the true love and respect for the words of Allah Ta'aala is lacking. We notice today that countless number of pamphlets with Qur'anic Aayaats are distributed as though they were some cheap cinema handbills, which so often end up on pavements, or filthy public toilets. Collection tins with Qur'anic Aayaats are placed in Kuffaar shops and handled by them. Muslims are prohibited from touching even one Aayaat of the Noble Qur'an without Tahaarah but alas the words of Allah Ta'aala have now become a cheap calendar decoration which after one year is thrown into the bins. We earnestly plead to all Muslims, "Please do not print, buy or sell stickers, booklets, calendar pamphlets, etc. with Qur'anic Aayaats on them as we will be assisting in showing disrespect to the words of Allah Ta'aala." May Allah make the Noble Qur'an a means of our guidance and make it an interceder in our favour on the day of Qiyaamat, Aameen. -- Jamiatul Ulama''' :Those are good sources for modern viewing of the issue I suppose, I think there is another side that isn't so strict that might deserve to be shown. I am wary of having Wikipedia just reflect Dawa books and not better scholarship. I think we could use classical views as well. User:Grenavitar 22:02, 17 May 2005 (UTC) ::Just as relevant (perhaps more so) is the popular insistence on the Qur'an's special status. This may give you a sense of the depth of feeling: http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2003-10/21/article07.shtml === Sunni ruling on desecration of Qur'an === (yes, it's that serious dept:) It is necessary to have evidence of two reliable witnesses corroborating each other before a Khazi (judge) shall be required to question the witnesses. Thereupon the witnesses will have to make statements describing the words uttered or the acts done which constitute apostasy. Apostasy can be committed in two ways: (1) by uttering expressly by tongue that he is (or has become) a Mushrik , a polytheist (i.e. one who associates others with the One God and considers them to be worthy of worship) or, by saying something which is bound to connote in its meaning a denial of the existence of God, for instance to say that God has corporeal (physical, material) existence just like any other corporeal object, or (2) by the performance of an act in which one cannot avoid the clear conclusion that it is tantamount to 'kufr' (infidelity, denial of Islam), '''for example, to throw away with contempt the holy Qur'an or any part of it or even a single word of it; or to throw it in the fire in an insulting, contemptuous manner; or to throw it in such a place as a garbage dump where there are filthy, dirty and repulsive things; or in a spittoon etc. These acts would be blasphemous and constitute apostasy.''' - from 'Abd al-Rahman Jaziri, Urdu translation, Munzur Ahsan Abbasi, Kitab al-fiqh Ala' al-Madahib al-Arba'ah, Lahore, Pakistan, Ulama Academy, 1985 :You have quoted a boatload of information now help to integrate it into the article and don't blanket "Islamic law says" give the sources of who says it like you listed for me, but in a manageable form for the article. It's not an issue of do I believe you or not, it's an issue of that section has a severe modern traditional Sunni POV and therefore you can quote or cite the texts in the article that lead you to what it says. Wikipedia:Cite sources this is what I'm talking about... not every Muslim makes the claim that you can't throw out a Qur'an... or that you have to have performed Wudu first what you imply there is that every single Muslim carries the exact same view on this issue. User:Grenavitar 02:12, 18 May 2005 (UTC) ::Gren, if you think a specific citation is important, why don't you take a pass at integrating some of the material I have provided here into the article, since it's your query, ok? ::The fact of its illegality is certainly not disputed, though, so please do not put that header back in the section. ::Before you edit: Let's think twice before adding an "on-the-one-hand-on-the-other-hand" mini-series to this article. The practice is universally condemned by jurists and the vast majority of Muslims, as I have set out above. ::It's like saying the Constitution mandates due process. ("Hmmm... Can you cite a recent Supreme Court decision specifically confirming that point, please? Do ALL politicians believe in due process? Surely not every American citizen makes the claim that due process is required in legal proceedings -- what about the minority view that it's a pain in the neck and not worth the bother?") User:BrandonYusufToropov 09:39, 18 May 2005 (UTC) :::The root of this is saying, "Islamic law states". There is no "Islamic law" that rules all Muslims, there are various attempts at jurisprudence and they may agree (and on this issue they do agree that it's bad to destroy... and to a lesser extent that you ''must'' have performed wudu or you are an apostate if you destroy. But, to say Islamic law states, is an untrue statement that is trying to cut off any others and place the mainstream as "the true Islam" and here on wikipedia there is only what most people believe... none of them are true or false. So, you have what most people believe, don't make it seem like it is the only view. User:Grenavitar 19:58, 18 May 2005 (UTC) ==An ex-soldier's POV== For what it's worth, I was a US soldier for five years. I don't think ANY holy scripture should be desecrated. If interrogators can't get info from recalcitrant prisoners by nice treatment (or even rough treatment), so be it. One of the best psychological weapons of war is to release POWs from time to time, and let them tell TRUE stories of how fairly they were treated. This is the best way to demoralize political opposition to one's campaign. The opposing campaign can't play the human rights card. In the Vietnamese War, the tiger cages of the south were: *violations of human rights, and thus despicable in and of themselves *a stupid and impractical PR mistake I won't say which is worse, but after the war, the winning side massacred half a million people, so draw your own conclusions. I believe we are all responsible for what we do. So we should do GOOD things, which benefit others. (Like the Koran says, right?) User:Ed Poor user talk:Ed Poor 16:14, May 18, 2005 (UTC) :hear, hear. not very on-topic here, of course, but I am glad to be reminded that there are fair soldiers on either side. As a fair soldier, though, I imagine I would be all the more angry with the fools, or worse than fools, that bring shame to my own side. User:Dbachmann User_talk:Dbachmann 08:30, 19 May 2005 (UTC) ::I'm sure the same sentiments would be expressed by a good percentage of the (remaining sane members of the) US intelligence community. To descend from ethical questions and issues of shame, down to the merely pragmatic level, this is apparently a really lousy way of gathering intelligence. If your goal, however, is the suicidal one of unifying the civilian populace against your campaign ... this is probably the very best way to go. User:BrandonYusufToropov 19:13, 19 May 2005 (UTC) :You have made too many assumptions here: ''remaining sane members'', ''this is probably the very best way''. I can only guess at your meaning. :Are you criticizing the intelligence community, i.e., they'd have to be crazy to do X? And are you assuming that Koran desecration was a prescribed tactic the interrogators used? :Sigh. That's they problem with a lot of liberals. They're so into their point of view, they assume all their readers share it. User:Ed Poor user talk:Ed Poor 20:25, May 23, 2005 (UTC) ::Was I assuming the desecration was a prescribed tactic the interrogators used? Given the number of different times it has shown up on the record... yeah. (Did you read the article you cited as Koran desecration?) ::You're under the assumption, presumably, that the multiple reports of this desecration are the result of: ::a) stark coincidence ::b) a conspiracy on the part of the media (which has somehow turned curiously obedient in the past week and a half) :::and/or ::c) delusional behavior on the part of the Red Cross, which took the extraordinary step of outing the White House by ''publicly'' citing a pattern of disrespect toward the Qur'an. ::If you opt for a), presumably you believe it was also a coincidence that personnel at Gitmo stripped people naked (so they couldn't pray clothed, as required by Islamic law) and deprived them of water with which to perform wudu (also required by Islamic law). Lots of complaints about these things. How many coincidences are you willing to ignore? When is a bad apple the product of a bad tree? Where did these non-Muslim interrogators get all this information about which actions, precisely, would inflame and degrade Muslims? The Weekly World News? ::Do I think the intelligence community was crazy to undertake this? No. "Stupid" is the word I would choose. "Crazy" would exempt them from moral accountability. ::Nobody wants to believe his country does bad things. That desire to imagine the best in our nation, however, does not prove our country is innocent when evidence points to the contrary. User:BrandonYusufToropov 01:13, 24 May 2005 (UTC) You left out (d) mischief-making by the prisoners or their friends outside: just make an accusation, then sit back and watch the fur fly. You seem to reagard the captured enemy fighters at Gitmo as being as innocent as the falsely accused banker in ''The Shawshank Redemption''. Did it ever occur to you that someone might lie about the US to gain a PR advantage? Or have the enemies of freedom taken a secret oath always to tell the truth? (Lying and murder usually go hand and hand, wake up.) User:Ed Poor user talk:Ed Poor 20:00, May 24, 2005 (UTC) ::Are you seriously suggesting that each and every one of the following reports was the result of a propensity for boyish pranks? ::* n 2003, an Afghan former prisoner told the Washington Post that U.S. soldiers tormented him by throwing the Koran in the toilet.[4] (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/13/AR2005051301377.html) :: * The BBC reported on December 30, 2004 that the former Guantánamo prisoner Abdallah Tabarak maintained that "American soldiers used to tear up copies of the Koran and throw them in the toilet." :: * In a book review dated January 16, 2005, the Hartford Courant reported that five British detainees, after their release, claimed that they "had seen other prisoners sexually humiliated, had been hooded, and were forced to watch copies of the Koran being flushed down toilets." (Compare: Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse) :: * The Philadelphia Inquirer reported on January 20, 2005 that there were complaints concerning guards who had "defaced their copies of the Koran and, in one case, had thrown it in a toilet." :: * The Miami Herald reported on March 6, 2005 that three Guantánamo captives — Fawzi al Odah, 27, Fouad al Rabiah, 45, and Khalid al Mutairi, 29 — "separately complained to their lawyer that military police threw their Korans into the toilet." :: * The Miami Herald also reported on March 9, 2005 that Guantánamo Base staff insulted Allah and "threw Korans into toilets." :: * The New York Times reported on May 1, 2005 that "Mr. al-Mutairi said ... a protest of guards' handling of copies of the Koran, which had been tossed into a pile and stepped on, a senior officer delivered an apology over the camp's loudspeaker system, pledging that such abuses would stop." :: * Credible reports also arose that "in August 2003, 23 Yemeni detainees reportedly tried to commit mass suicide after a guard stomped on the Koran." ::http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/18/1434259 ::'''I respectfully disagree that with your contention that these and other mainstream reports of Qur'an desecration were individual, coincidental instances of "mischief-making" meant to allow bored servicement to "watch the fur fly" -- and I simply cannot believe that my reasons for disagreeing are not yet clear to you. ::I would reiterate to you that the Red Cross, about which you have been curiously silent, does not normally go public and blow the whistle on governments. It has, as a matter of public record, done so in this case. Someone was giving orders. The Red Cross intervened (successfully) in order to stop those orders. User:BrandonYusufToropov 21:00, 24 May 2005 (UTC) :False dichotomy. It's not an either-or. You assume that either (a) all the reports were made up or (b) none of them was made up. See excluded middle. :Look , I can tell you're pissed off about something. But your assumption that the anti-US forces are the good guys and would not lie, is childish - even petulant. :None of which has anything to do with an article about the Holy Koran. Or about actually following its precepts. My Iraqi-American friend has a lot to say about this sort of hypocrisy. Just get real, okay? User:Ed Poor user talk:Ed Poor 23:09, May 24, 2005 (UTC) :On further reflection, I'd rather not use Wikipedia as a forum to debate which of us can claim the moral high ground. Let's try to fix the mess together, instead of wasting time blaming one another. User:Ed Poor user talk:Ed Poor 23:15, May 24, 2005 (UTC) ::Works for me. User:BrandonYusufToropov 09:41, 25 May 2005 (UTC) It was aired tomorrow on ARY one world ( A Pakistani private news channel ), an interview with a Pakistani released from Goantanamo . He said this Quran desecration stuff has been going on for a long time . It happened at Baghram ( Afghanistan )too . The US soldiers used to throw Quran in human feces buckets . Though he also said that some of the solders who did this with Quran did the same with Bible too . May be it was few solders , may be the whole intelligence , I dont know . Important thing is that Americans should understand that the more they do stuff like that , the more they create people like OBL . There R many muslim countries that R trying their best not to create another one of his kind . But then how to stop Americans . They made the first OBL ( I wonder how many people in US actually know this ) , & they R doing their best to create more of his kind . User:Farhansher 20:54, 24 May 2005 (UTC)I don't think you need to be 'a liberal' to see a pattern emerging here.
US exempts prisoners from the Geneva Conventions. US exempts its citizens from International_Criminal_Court#U.S._objections jurisdiction.
US torture by proxy. — condemnation of such selling out of "Western values" should not be a "party line" thing, let alone reserved for 'liberals'. Sadly, not 'much moral high ground' in sight here, on either side :o( User:Dbachmann User_talk:Dbachmann 10:28, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
===You struck out===
#not ALL prisoners, just "stateless ones" captured out of uniform. If they wear uniforms or can claim membership in some country's army, then G.C. applies.
#ICC was created specifically to target US citizens; it's a crock; look who's on the UN human rights commission: the world's biggest violators
#you're confusing your definitions of torture, ignorantly or deliberately. Rough treatment falls into at least 3 categories: permitted interrogation/control methods, prisoner abuse, and actual torture.
#Sadly, liberals want to give terrorists the same rights as US citizens, while most of the world doesn't even enjoy those rights.
#It all adds up to a campaign to destroy America. Keep it out of Wikipedia, or write about anti-Americanism in the anti-Americanism article, if you can follow NPOV. User:Ed Poor user talk:Ed Poor 20:06, May 25, 2005 (UTC)
replied to your talk, Talk:Qur'an is probably no place to discuss the destruction of America (which we agree is happening, only, I argue, from the inside out). User:Dbachmann User_talk:Dbachmann 09:01, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
Hear hear. Ed, you're ranting about patriotism after claiming to have realized that this is not the page for such rants. Let's not, ok?User:BrandonYusufToropov 11:41, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
:Dab and Brandon, you are both right. And thanks to whoever fixed the sub-heading.
:Brandon and I have a vigorous debate going on at talk:Ed Poor. User:Ed Poor user talk:Ed Poor 16:30, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
== Major revision ==
Someone had re-done the section on textual criticism in a way that I felt quite misrepresented Western Quranic scholarship, and I had promised to rewrite it. I finally got a round tuit, and while I was at it, re-organized the entire article. I deleted very very little, and added a few short sections that filled gaps, at least as I saw them.
I've spent hours on the re-organization and I've pooped out on filling in references. Frex, I need references for Fred Donner. I'll get to that as soon as I can.
I'm hoping that this re-org will not be controversial, since it mostly re-shuffles what was there previously. The only major changes are in the textual criticism section.
There are probably all sorts of typos and mistakes, and I would very much appreciate community help in fixing them. If I've erred in the direction of POV in any section, I imagine that I'll be told about that too. User:Zora 03:11, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
Uthman ibn al-Khattab? There's no such person... - User:Mustafaa 03:29, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
: Sorry, too tired to check names. User:Zora 03:56, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
I'd really like a reference for "As early as the caliph Uthman ibn al-Khattab, only a few decades after the prophet's death, ''many passages of the Qur'an had become obscure''..." Apart from the name being wrong, is this actually clear? It does not follow from the anecdote in the next sentence, certainly. - User:Mustafaa 03:32, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
: That's a memory of some of the Quranic exegesis I've been reading, I'll have to look up the reference. User:Zora 03:56, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
"However, there are seeming inconsistencies in the Qur'an. Wine-drinking is allowed and forbidden, more than four wives are allowed and forbidden, etc." Where does it say in the Qur'an that either of those are allowed? Rather, there are passages which don't presuppose that they are forbidden - which is not the same thing at all. - User:Mustafaa 03:36, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
: That is a better formulation. Could you fix it please? User:Zora 03:56, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
"Some Muslim scholars say that if the Qur'an had been collected by the order of a caliph, it would never have been relegated to the status of a keepsake for one of the prophet's widows" - kind of vague wording, innit? - User:Mustafaa 03:43, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
: That's a rewrite of a sentence that was in the original. I didn't get references, and I probably should have done so. I can only plead fatigue. I wanted to get the main outlines of the revision up, so that others could help me work on them, rather than plugging away on it for another day or two, alone. I appreciate your criticisms and beg you to feel free to fix anything that needs fixing. I find that I usually agree with you. I'll squawk if I don't. User:Zora 03:56, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
::Thank you Mustafaa, for wrestling this ungainly section to the ground, and thank you Zora, for helping. I had meant to revise this for some time and gotten distracted. All the more important now that the Qur'an is front page news and this is an even more high-visibility article than normal User:BrandonYusufToropov 11:39, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
Thanks Zora. I'm still sceptical about "As early as the caliph Uthman ibn Affan, only a few decades after the prophet's death, many passages of the Qur'an had become obscure, as Arabic had changed so much, so rapidly. It is said that Uthman and his scholars consulted the Bedouin of the desert when they were unsure of their reading of the Qur'an, as the Bedouin had preserved the Arabic language more tenaciously." It simply doesn't make sense that Uthman ibn Affan - who had learned his native tongue well before any of these upheavals - should have found these passages any more obscure than the other people of the Prophet's time did. A much more plausible explanation of such consultation would be that the language of the Qur'an was more complex than the daily language of Quraish to begin with; it is commonly believed that (with Arabic as with Ainu) an unwritten literary standard had already been established in pre-Islamic times, and it is known for certain that the dialects of the various Bedouin tribes did not coincide perfectly with this standard. - User:Mustafaa 18:23, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
: When I think about it, you're absolutely RIGHT. People who were alive when Muhammad was alive, and understood his revelations then, wouldn't have completely forgotten everything twenty years later. I will have to hunt down references to Quranic language. In the meantime, we need to remove any references to Uthman and just say that after a few ''generations'', not decades, Arabic had changed greatly. I think you would accept that, yes? User:Zora 21:57, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
''"The language rapidly changed in response to this new situation, losing complexities of case and obscure vocabulary. Several generations after the prophet's death, many passages of the Qur'an had become opaque to ordinary Arabic-speakers, as Arabic had changed so much, so rapidly".''
::Is there any reference about this . I mean a lot of non-arabic vocab must have been included in the language , but a language doesnt have to change its grammer . & the the previously used vocab doesent becone that much forgotten . The very same Arabic is still taught in Arabian peninsula , I have friends in Indian sub-continent & Asia-pacific regions who can read/understand Quran & speak the same to Arabs or understand the same from Arab channels .We have got a thousand year old poetry by Amir Khusro in Urdu , at a time when the language was being born . And the poetry is still understandable ,still having the very same grammer , though with some very little changes in some vovels . User:Farhansher 07:50, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
::: It has been a while since I've read much about Arab linguistics, but I understand that literary Arabic -- as to a great extent defined by the Qur'an -- has diverged greatly from the various Arabic dialects/vernaculars. Educated people learn speak and write literary Arabic, which is the language used for TV broadcasts and the like. So it's not surprising that Muslims educated IN literary Arabic in various countries would be able to communicate with each other. They'd be less likely to understand the guy on the street in Cairo or Baghdad. But I could be wrong ...
::: For a while I had a Tongan girl living with me while she went to university. She had spent many years studying IN English in one of the better Tongan schools, and her formal English was good. But she had a hard time with ordinary conversation and especially with slang. I think this might be the same sort of thing. User:Zora 14:42, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
:::: Well ...yea.. I do agree there might be a difference b/w street arabic & literal arabic . But the line I quoted says
::::''Several generations after the prophet's death, many passages of the Qur'an had become opaque to ordinary Arabic-speakers, as Arabic had changed so much, so rapidly''
::::As I said b4 , Amir Khusro hasent become opaque to me after 1000 years . For outsiders....well may be
Farhansher, take a look at this webpage [http://www.indiana.edu/~arabic/arabic_history.htm]. It makes the very interesting observation that many Arabic-speakers ignore the existence of colloquial Arabic and insist that ''fusha'' is the only REAL Arabic. User:Zora 10:45, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
==Abrogation==
I've been looking into abrogation online, and to be honest, I'm having trouble understanding why any of the most widely cited instances constitute abrogation. (see eg [http://www.ymofmd.com/books/uaq/ch5s3.htm] [http://www.iant.com/imam/book.txt]). For instance, why exactly does 2:234 abrogate 2:240? They don't contradict each other, as far as I can see. Anyone have any ideas? - User:Mustafaa 21:41, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
: I haven't had time to look at the sites, but I do think your rewrite an improvement. Thanks for the help. User:Zora 22:30, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:: This is an EXTREMELY contentious topic that we are, I think, best off mentioning briefly here (i.e., much more briefly than now) and simply shunting off to another article, Qur'anic abrogation for further development.
:: The subject cannot possibly be dealt with here in depth without drawing partisan bickering, and attempts to identify examples often turn into shouting matches.
:: Critics of the mainstream view are fond of pointing out that actual examples of abrogation are inevitably open to plausible challenge, and the argument is an ancient one. (See links below.) So far as I can tell, there is no list of abrogated verses that everyone accepts.
:: I too scurried immediately to 2:234 and 2:240, wondering if this was the one that would jump out at me as obvious, but I could simply find no reason to consider one as abrogating the other.
:: For non-mainstream arguments, which are worth reviewing, see especially this superb overview:
:: http://www.geocities.com/forpeoplewhothink/Topics/Abrogation_in_the_Quran.html
:: And this more partisan, but still impressive, hike up the mountain:
:: http://www.quran-islam.org/89.html
:: Remember that "ayat" does not necessarily mean "verse of the Qur'an" -- it can mean "miracle" or (perhaps most pertinently) "previous revelation" (e.g., Taurat or Injeel).
:: Peace, User:BrandonYusufToropov 12:05, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::: I agree that this is definitely a can of worms, and indeed looks to me like a rather unconvincing doctrine. However, I don't see how we can mention it any more briefly than the two sentences currently devoted to it here. - User:Mustafaa 16:47, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== The Qur'an and science ==
An anon editor inserted a section on the Qur'an containing all of life and science. I reverted it for now, but I think perhaps we ought to mention this, if only to head off other enthusiasts.
I've been reading academics on the Qur'an, but I gather that there's a whole world of dubious Qur'an exegesis out there, dedicated to proving that it contains all scientific wisdom, that it can be interpreted numerologically to prove this or that ... a Kabbalistic approach, or so it seems to me. Perhaps a short section, a para, and a breakout article?
I'd start it, but this is something about which I know little or nothing. User:Zora 01:41, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
: The numerology stuff is mostly specific to some rather odd new sects, and belongs more in Rashad Khalifa than here; it might merit a one-sentence mention. The science stuff has a better reputation; it's a popular theme of ''da`wa'' literature in recent years. It might well be worth noting briefly. - User:Mustafaa 02:29, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::There are indeed some striking prefigurings of modern scientific findings, as well as an intriguing thread coursing throughout the text on the relativity of time, which is an odd topic for seventh-century Arabia. However, this material is a) controversial and b) unrelated, as far as I can tell, to matters of faith and practice.
::As I've mentioned before, I would not place the scientific parallels here, or even reference them, as they're likely to be perceived as distracting and biased. They're not what the Qur'an is about. The numerological claims are in another category entirely, in that they are rejected by huge majorities of Muslims; I'd vote for skipping them simply because they make Islam look like a three-card-monte game. (Not the case with the scientific parallels, which are quite difficult to explain, if only for their sheer number.)
::There are also a number of apparently accurate historical predictions, the most famous of which is the prediction of Byzantine victory against the Persians in the surah entitled The Romans. These, too, however, are frequently appealed to in Muslim apologetics, and this would run the risk of being perceived as proselytizing. My preference would be to skip all of this stuff, or, failing that, to link to a new article along the lines of Reported Miracles in the Qur'an, though I predict such an article would get very messy indeed very quickly. User:BrandonYusufToropov 12:14, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== Piss Koran? ==
Can anyone verify yet the new artwork entitled Piss Koran? I just found a page on it in Wikipedia: Piss Koran. User:Flatbush 22:39, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
: There's a reason that page is up for deletion... - User:Mustafaa 23:33, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== Pietistic edits by anon ==
A new anon editor worked a bit on the Qur'an article, modifying text re comprehensibility of literary Arabic vs. colloquial Arabic, adding bits re beauties of Quranic prose and value as guide to life. I reverted those edits.
The first, because it contravenes everything I've read about the Qur'an and Arabic dialects -- even though it also exemplifies a phenomenon noted by various linguists, that is, Arab insistence that literary/Quranic Arabic is the only REAL Arabic, and consequent averting of the eyes from colloquial Arabic. Though .... hmmmm ... it might be useful to spell that out in the article, so that this doesn't come up again and again. This is the second time.
The last-named edits, because they were pietistic and POV. If there were no other comments re the reverence Muslims feel for the Quran, these edits might have been useful, but I think there's sufficient material there to indicate reverence. User:Zora 22:52, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== Devabration's edits ==
This article is meant to be acceptable to all, Muslim or non-Muslim; it should not be a pious tract. Devabration, your additions were too POV to keep. Sorry ... please try again, perhaps on a less charged topic. User:Zora 06:27, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
: POV or non-POV, Debravation's edits are copied from [http://www.qurancomplex.com/infoquran.asp?l=eng&SecOrder=1&SubSecOrder=2 Qur'an Complex], which is copyrighted text ("All Rights Reserved for the King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Qur'an"). Please respect the relevant laws. - User:Mustafaa 19:17, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== Very interesting ==
An anon editor recently added a link to a site with "free Quranic software". The site also seemed to have commercial software, and it wasn't clear to me that the Quranic software was all that useful or popular, so I deleted it as being an advertising link. Hmmm, well, the anon tracked me down and sent an email to my RL email account, pointing out in an aggrieved tone that he was giving away the Quranic software. I sent him a reply, which bounced -- "Shatly" was using an invalid address. This was sure a strange interaction. For the record, I don't think it should be site owners linking their sites -- it should be impartial third parties who have found the site useful. Preferably editors we know, who are clearly not sockpuppets. Well, that's my take on it. User:Zora 00:44, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:Assuming the site had no advertisements and was all free software... I see no direct problem (yes, that is a rather odd thing to happen though). However, I think there is a good question in all of this... there are is good free software that for things like Adhan alarms... should any article link to that kind of thing (which is useful to a Muslim) but... not really encyclopedic in the sense that Qur'an or hadith software is? (but, definitely a no to advertisement sites). User:Grenavitar 01:30, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::Hi Zora, I am new to Wikipedia, so I am just learning to use this system. So, Sorry for any mistakes from my side.
::I have given a valid email address to Wiki, but I have disabled email in preferences. I have now enabled it.
::Regarding the Quran software link I have added, It is a free and useful tool for learning the Quran. This site is ranked No 1 for "Quran Software" search in Google. Besides displaying Arabic translation and 3 different tranlations for the recited verse, it has also word by word meaning for 30th part of Quran. I thought this might be of interest to the visitors of Quran page.User:Shatly 01:30, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::: Shatly, thank you for coming here and speaking to the rest of us. I'm much less puzzled and distrustful than I was.
::: However, I don't think you've convinced ME that your site should be linked. Of course you think it's great software and a useful site. But do other people think so? I admit that top google ranking is an argument in favor, since that's based on links in other top-rated sites. But there isn't a satisfied user urging inclusion ... Gren seems to be leaning towards inclusion, I'm against. What do other editors think? I'll go with the majority.
::: While you're here, Shatly, there are LOTS of Islamic articles that need work People fuss endlessly over Muhammad, Qur'an, and Islam, but there are many "smaller" topics that aren't treated at all -- especially in Islamic history and biography. Lots of poets, theologians, jurists, musicians, historians, etc. need better bios. User:Zora 20:16, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::::if the software is free and useful (is it platform independent? if not, mention the platform it runs on with the link), why not? I mean, we don't ''need'' to link to it, and sooner or later somebody cleaning out the links will remove it again, but as you say, we have more urgent problems than that. but somebody actually try out the software, I would hate to have us link to spyware, or to some blatantly indoctrinated pamphlet. User:Dbachmann User_talk:Dbachmann 21:28, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::::: Ok, it is best to include this link ([http://www.shaplus.com/free-quran-software/quran-mp3-software/QuranReciter/quranreciter-free-download.htm Free audio recitation software of Quran(Windows version only)]) in Audio/Video section if others are in favour of this.
::::: As Zora mentioned, there are lot of work pending in other Islamic sections, I will see how I can contribute usefully in these area.User:Shatly
::::::but why in $DEITY's name do you need ''software'' for audio quran recitation? Why don't you just publish the mp3's for download? That seems just excessive bloat. And what audio files do you use? Ones you found on the internet? In that case the whole thing is utterly redundant... (I cannot look at your software, as I do not have windows) User:Dbachmann User_talk:Dbachmann 09:16, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::::::ah, I say, why don't we just link to [http://www.shaplus.com/free-quran-software/quran-mp3-software/QuranReciter/quran-mp3.htm Quran recitation MP3 files] (if they are any good - any opinions?)? These can be used by everybody, and your software is linked to from that page. User:Dbachmann User_talk:Dbachmann 09:20, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::::::I'm curious, is your reciting software anything like a karaoke machine, you know, with a hopping dot on the text showing what is being recited? I would think that was quite funny, actually :) User:Dbachmann User_talk:Dbachmann 09:23, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::::::: the mp3 files seem quite good quality, compared to our other link. Let me link to them, then. User:Dbachmann User_talk:Dbachmann 09:29, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
#REDIRECT Qur'an
#redirect Qur'an
See other meanings of words starting from letter:A | B | C | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | R | S | T | U | V | X | Y | Z |
Qur'an
The '''Qur'an''' ( ''al-qur'ān''; its literal meaning is "the recitation" and is often called "Al Qur'ān Al Karīm": "The Noble Qur'an" or "The Glorious Qur'ān," also Transliteration as Quran, Koran, and less commonly Alcoran) is the Sacred text of Islam. Muslims believe that the Qur'an is the literal word of God and the culmination of God's revelation to mankind, revealed to the Prophet Muhammad over a period of 23 years by the Angel Jibreel (Gabriel). == Format of the Qur'an == The Qur'an consists of 114 (number) suras (chapters) with a total of 6,236 ayat (verses; the exact number of ayat is disputed, not due to content dispute but due to different methods of counting; the sect founded by Rashad Khalifa claims the exact number is 6,346). Muslims usually refer to the suras not by their numbers, but by an Arabic name derived in some way from the sura. (See sura.) The suras are not arranged in chronological order (in the order in which Islamic scholars believe they were revealed) but in a different order, roughly by size, also believed by Muslims to be divinely inspired. After a short opening, the Qur'an proceeds to the longest sura, and closes with some of the shortest ones. == The Qur'an as divided for reading and recitation == In addition to and largely independent of the division into suras, there are various ways of dividing the Qur'an into parts of approximately equal length for convenience in reading, reciting and memorizing. The seven manzil (stations) and the thirty juz' (parts) can be used to work through the entire Qur’an in a week or a month, one manzil or one juz' a day, respectively. A juz' is sometimes further divided into two hizb (groups), and each hizb is in turn subdivided into four quarters. A different structure is provided by the ruku'at, semantical units resembling paragraphs and comprising roughly ten ayat each. == The language of the Qur'an == The Qur'an is one of the first written works in Arabic. It is written in an early form of classical Arabic language termed in English “Quranic” Arabic. There are few other examples of Arabic from that time. (The ''Mu'allaqat'', or ''Suspended Odes'', are believed by some to be examples of pre-Islamic Arabic; others say that they were created after Muhammad. Only five pre-Islamic Arabic inscriptions survive.) Soon after Muhammad's death in 632 CE, Islam burst out of Arabia and conquered much of what was then the “civilized” world. Arab rulers had millions of foreign subjects, with whom they had to communicate. The language rapidly changed in response to this new situation, losing complexities of case and obscure vocabulary. Several generations after the prophet's death, many words used in the Qur'an had become opaque to ordinary sedentary Arabic-speakers, as Arabic had changed so much, so rapidly. The Bedouin speech changed at a considerably slower rate, however, and early Arabic lexicographers came to seek out Bedouin to explain difficult words or elucidate points of grammar. Partly in response to the religious need to explain the Qur'an to poorer speakers, Arabic grammar and lexicography soon became important sciences, and the model for the literary language remains to this day the speech used in Qur'anic times, rather than the current spoken dialects. Muslims contend that the Qur'an is remarkable for its poetry and grace, and that its very literary perfection is proof of its divine origin. Since this perfection is apparent only to those who speak Arabic, only the original Arabic text is considered the ''real'' Qur’an. Translations are considered mere glosses. The traditions governing the translation and publication of the Qur'an state that when the book is published, it must never simply be entitled "The Qur'an." The title must always include a defining adjective (avoiding conceivable confusion with other "recitations", in the Arabic sense), which is why all available editions of the Qur'an are titled ''The Glorious Qur'an, The Noble Qur'an,'' and other similar titles. Every reputable Islamic scholar should be able to read and understand the Qur'an in its original form. Many Muslims who do not otherwise understand Arabic memorize the whole text in Arabic, considering that they are closer to God in doing so. == Stylistic attributes == The Qur'an mixes narrative, exhortation, and legal prescription. The suras frequently combine all these modes, not always in ways that seem sensible or obvious to the non-Muslim reader. There are many repeated epithets (e.g. "Lord of the heavens and the earth"), sentences ("And when We said unto the angels: Prostrate yourselves before Adam, they fell prostrate, all save Iblis"), and even stories (such as the story of Adam) in the Qur'an. Muslim scholars explain these repetitions as emphasizing and pointing up different aspects of important themes. The Qur'an is partly rhymed, partly prose. Traditionally, the Arabic grammarians consider the Qur'an to be a genre unique unto itself, neither poetry (defined as speech with metre and rhyme) nor prose (defined as normal speech or rhymed but non-metrical speech, saj'.) The Qur'an often, although by no means always, uses loose rhyme between successive verses; for instance, at the beginning of surat al-Fajr: : Wal-fajr(i), : Wa layâlin `ashr(in), : Wash-shaf`i wal-watr(i) : Wal-layli 'idhâ yasr(î), : Hal fî dhâlika qasamun li-dhî ḥijr(in). or, to give a less loose example, the whole of surat al-Fil: : 'A-lam tara kayfa fa`ala rabbuka bi-'aṣḥâbi l-fîl(i), : 'A-lam yaj`al kaydahum fî taḍlîl(in) : Wa-'arsala `alayhim ṭayran 'abâbîl(a) : Tarmîhim bi-ḥijâratin min sijjîl(in) : Fa-ja`alahum ka-`aṣfin ma'kûl(in). Note that verse-final vowels are unpronounced when the verses are enunciated separately, a regular pausal phenomenon in classical Arabic language. In these cases, ''î'' and ''û'' often rhyme, and there is some scope for variation in syllable-final consonants. Some suras also include a refrain repeated every few verses, for instance ar-Rahman ("Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny?") and al-Mursalat ("Woe unto the repudiators on that day!") Islamic scholars divide the verses of the Qur'an into those revealed at Mecca (Makka), and those revealed at Medina (Madina) after the Hijra. In general, the earlier Makkan suras tend to have shorter verses than the later Madinan suras, with legal verses being particularly long. Contrast the Makkan verses above with a verse such as al-Baqara 229: : ''Divorce must be pronounced twice and then (a woman) must be retained in honour or released in kindness. And it is not lawful for you that ye take from women aught of that which ye have given them; except (in the case) when both fear that they may not be able to keep within the limits (imposed by) Allah. And if ye fear that they may not be able to keep the limits of Allah, in that case it is no sin for either of them if the woman ransom herself. These are the limits (imposed by) Allah. Transgress them not. For whoso transgresseth Allah's limits: such are wrong-doers.'' Similarly, the Madinan suras tend to be longer, including the longest sura of the Qur'an, al-Baqara. == The beginnings of the suras == Every chapter but one is preceded by the words ''basmala'', "In the Name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate". 29 suras begin with letters taken from a restricted subset of the Arabic alphabet; thus, for instance, surat Maryam (sura) begins "Kaf. Ha. Ya. 'Ain. Sad. A mention of the mercy of thy Lord unto His servant Zachariah." While there has been some speculation on the meaning of these letters, the consensus of Muslim scholars is that these letters' full meaning is beyond our understanding. However, they have observed that in all but 4 of the 29 cases, these letters are almost immediately followed by mention of the Qur'anic revelation itself. Western scholars' efforts have been tentative; one proposal, for instance, was that they were initials or monograms of the scribes that had originally written the sura down. See Qur'anic initial letters for a fuller discussion. == The temporal order of Quranic verses == Belief in the Qur'an's direct, uncorrupted divine origin is considered fundamental to Islam by most Muslims. This of course entails believing that the Qur'an has neither errors nor inconsistencies. : "This is the book in which there is no doubt, a guide to the believers": Surat al-Baqarah, verse 2.) However, there are instances where some verses presuppose that a given practice is allowed, while others forbid it. These are interpreted by Muslims in the light of the relative chronology of the verses: since the Qur'an was revealed over a course of 23 years, many verses were clarified or abrogated by later verses. Muslim commentators explain that this is because Muhammad was directed to gradually lead his small band of believers towards the straight path, rather than reveal the full rigor of the law at once. For example, the prohibition of alcohol was accomplished gradually rather than immediately. The earliest verse tells the believers to "Approach not prayers with a mind befogged, until ye can understand all that ye say, ..." (4:43), a prohibition of drunkenness but not alcohol. Later verses expanded prohibition to all alcohol consumption: "They ask thee concerning wine and gambling, say: "In them is great sin, and some profit, for men; but the sin is greater than the profit..."(2:219). In addition, there are cases where most Muslim scholars accept the doctrine of ''abrogation'' (''naskh''), whereby verses revealed later sometimes supersede verses received earlier. Which verses abrogate which others, if any, is, however, a controversial matter. == Quranic material found in other sacred texts == The Qur'an retells stories of many of the people and events recounted in Judaism and Christianity sacred books (Torah, Bible) and devotional literature (Apocrypha, Midrash), although it differs in many details. Well-known Biblical characters such as Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and John the Baptist are mentioned in the Qur'an as Prophets of Islam. (For a complete list, see Similarities between the Bible and the Qur'an). Muslims account for differences between Quranic versions and Christian or Jewish texts by saying that the Christian and Jewish texts have been corrupted, and that only the Qur'an preserves the correct version. == Origin and development of the Qur'an == This is a topic of some delicacy, since Islamic scholars proceed with the assumption that the Qur'an is a divine and uncorrupted text, while scholars in the Western secular tradition start with the notion that the Qur'an is a human production to be explained without reference to the supernatural. === According to Islamic scholars === Muhammad, according to tradition, could neither read nor write, but would simply recite what was revealed to him for his companions to write down and memorize. Adherents to Islam hold that the wording of the Qur'anic text available today corresponds exactly to that revealed to Muhammad himself: words of God delivered to Muhammad through Jibreel (Gabriel). According to some Muslim traditions, the companions of Muhammad began recording suras in writing before Muhammad died in 632; written copies of various suras during his lifetime are frequently alluded to in the traditions. For instance, in the story of the conversion of Umar ibn al-Khattab (when Muhammad was still at Mecca), his sister is said to have been reading a text of sura Ta-Ha. At Medina, about sixty-five sahaba are said to have acted as scribes for him at one time or another; the prophet would regularly call upon them to write down revelations immediately after they came. One tradition has it that the first complete compilation of the Qur'an was made during the rule of the first caliph, Abu Bakr. Zayd ibn Thabit, who had been one of Muhammad's secretaries, "gathered the Qur'an from various parchments and pieces of bone, and from the chests (i.e. the memories) of men." This compilation was kept by Hafsa bint Umar, one of Muhammad's widows, as well as the daughter of Umar, the second caliph. During the caliphate of Uthman ibn Affan, there were disputes about the recitation of the Qur'an. In response, Uthman decided to codify, standardize, and write down the text. Uthman is said to have commissioned a committee (including Zayd and several prominent members of Quraysh) to produce a standard copy of the text. Some accounts say that this compilation was based on the text kept by Hafsa. Other stories say that Uthman made his compilation independently, Hafsa's text was brought forward, and the two texts were found to coincide perfectly. Still other accounts omit any reference to Hafsa. Some Muslim scholars say that if the Qur'an had been collected by the order of a caliph, it would never have been relegated to the status of a keepsake for one of the prophet's widows. Possibly the story was invented to move the time of collection closer to Muhammad's death. [[Image:AndalusQuran.JPG|thumb|right|280px|12th century Andalusian Qur'an]] When the compilation was finished, sometime between 650 and 656 CE, Uthman sent out copies of it to the various corners of the Islamic empire. He ordered the destruction of all copies that differed from it. Several manuscripts, including the Samarkand manuscript, are claimed to the original copies sent out by Uthman [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Mss/]; however, many scholars, Western and Islamic, doubt that any of the Uthmanic originals remain. What were the different copies that were destroyed? Islamic traditions say that Abdallah Ibn Masud, Ubay Ibn Ka'b, and Ali ibn Abi Talib, Muhammad's son-in-law, had preserved versions that differed in some ways from the Uthmanic text that is now accepted by all Muslims. Muslim scholars record certain of the differences between the versions; those recorded consist almost entirely of orthographical and lexical variants, or different verse counts. All three (Ibn Masud, Ubay Ibn Ka'b, and Ali) are recorded as having accepted the Uthmanic text as authoritative. Uthman's version was written in an older Arabic script that left out most vowel markings; thus the script could be interpreted and read in various ways. This basic Uthmanic script is called the rasm; it is the basis of several traditions of oral recitation, differing in minor points. In order to fix these oral recitations and prevent any mistakes, scribes and scholars began annotating the Uthmanic rasm with various diacritical marks -- dots and the like -- indicating how the word was to be pronounced. It is believed that this process of annotation began around 700 CE, soon after Uthman's compilation, and finished by approximately 900 CE. The Quran text most widely used today is based on the Hafs tradition of recitation, as approved by the eminent Al-Azhar University in Cairo in 1922. (For more information regarding traditions of recitations, see ''Quranic recitation'', below.) === According to secular scholars === There is no one theory of Quranic origins that is accepted by all Western-style or secular scholars. Many scholars have accepted something like the traditional Muslim version. They believe that Muhammad put forth verses and laws that he claimed to be of divine origin; that his followers memorized or wrote down his revelations; that numerous versions of these revelations circulated after his death in 632 CE, and that Uthman ordered the collection and ordering of this mass of material in the time period (650-656) described by the Islamic scholars. These Western scholars point to many characteristics of the Qur'an -- the repetitions, the arbitrary ordering, the mixture of styles and genres -- as indicative of a human collection process that was extremely respectful of the original sources. There has been no evident organizing and harmonizing of the text. These scholars account for the many similarities between the Qur'an and the Jewish and Hebrew scriptures by saying that Muhammad was teaching what he believed a universal history, as he had heard it from the Jews and Christians he had encountered in Arabia and on his travels. Differences between the Qur'an and the Judeo-Christian scriptures can usually be explained by Muhammad's reliance on folk traditions rather than the actual text of the scriptures. There have been many studies of Muhammad's sources in the Jewish Mishnah, Gemara, and Midrash, and the Christian Apocrypha. This, of course, directly contradicts the Islamic teaching that it is the Judeo-Christian texts that are corrupt. Western scholars also dispute the Islamic belief that the whole of the Qur'an is addressed by God to humankind. They note that there are numerous passages where God is directly addressed, or mentioned in the third person, or where the narrator swears by various entities, including God. : "Some asked what need there was for God to take oaths like any mortal being, as when he swears by the fig and olive, and by Mount Sinai (95:1); by the declining day (103:1); and by the stars, the night and the dawn (81:15-18). Above all, they asked why the Almighty had to swear on himself ..." (Walker, cited in ''Foundations of Islam'', Peter Owen, 1998 p. 156) Western scholars have also been bold enough to point out obscurities in the text, claiming that Muslim commentators have invented explanations rather than admit that they don't know what a word means. Some Western scholars have been actively trying to interpret these obscure words by reference to languages that Muhammad might have encountered, such as Aramaic and Syriac, and from which he might have adopted words not then found in Arabic. Some scholars have tried to resolve obscurities by positing textual corruption, and advancing plausible replacements -- which is, of course, anathema in Muslim eyes. Muslims believe that the Qur'an is complete, perfect, and uncorrupted. Some Western scholars are less willing to attribute the entire Qur'an to Muhammad. They argue that there is no real proof that the text of the Qur'an was collected under Uthman, since the earliest surviving copies of the complete Qur'an are centuries later than Uthman. (The oldest existing copy of the full text is from the ninth century [http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/features/quran/index.shtml].) They see Islam as being formed slowly, over the centuries after the Muslim conquests, as the Islamic conquerors elaborated their beliefs in response to Jewish and Christian challenges. One influential proponent of this point of view was Dr. John Wansbrough, an English academic. Wansbrough wrote in a dense, complex, almost hermetic style, and he has had much more influence on Islamic studies through his students, Michael Cook and Patricia Crone than he has through his own writings. In 1977 Crone and Cook published a book called ''Hagarism'', which argued that, : ''The Qur'an is strikingly lacking in overall structure, frequently obscure and inconsequential in both language and content, perfunctory in its linking of disparate materials, and given to the repetition of whole passages in variant versions. On this basis it can plausibly be argued that the book is the product of belated and imperfect editing of materials from a plurality of traditions.'' (Patricia Crone and Michael Cook, ''Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World'', Cambridge, 1977, p. 18.) ''Hagarism'' was extremely controversial at the time, as it challenged not only Muslim orthodoxy, but the prevailing attitudes among secular Islamicists. Crone and Cook have since retreated from their extreme claims that the Qur'an evolved over several centuries, but they still believe that the Sunni scholarly tradition is extremely unreliable, as it projects current Sunni orthodoxy onto the past -- much as if New Testament scholars were dedicated to proving that Jesus was a Presbyterian or a Methodist. Fred Donner has argued against Crone and Cook, and for an early date for the collection of the Qur'an, based on his reading of the text itself. He points out that if the Qur'an had been collected over the tumultuous early centuries of Islam, with their vast conquests and bloody squabbles between rivals for the caliphate, there would have been some evidence of this history in the text. However, there is nothing in the Qur'an that does not reflect what is known of the earliest Muslim community. (''Narratives of Islamic Origins: The Beginnings of Islamic Historical Writing'', Donner, Darwin Press, 1998, p. 60.) Recent archaeological finds have also shed some light on the origins of the Qur'an. In 1972, during the restoration of the Great Mosque of San'a, in Yemen, laborers stumbled upon a "paper grave" containing tens of thousands of fragments of parchment on which verses of the Qur'an were written. (Qur'ans were and still are disposed thus, so as to avoid the impiety of treating the sacred text like ordinary garbage.) Some of these fragments were the oldest Quranic texts yet found [http://www.derafsh-kaviyani.com/english/quran1.html]. The European scholar Gerd-R. Puin has studied these fragments and published not only a corpus of texts, but some preliminary findings. Interestingly enough, the variations from the received text that he did find seemed to match variations reported by Islamic scholars, in their descriptions of the variant Qur'ans once held by Abdallah Ibn Masud, Ubay Ibn Ka'b, and Ali ibn Abi Talib, and suppressed by Uthman's order. ("Observations on Early Qur'an Manuscripts in San'a", Puin, in ''The Qur'an as Text'', ed. Wild, Brill, 1996) == Interpretation of the Qur'an == Even the clearest sacred scripture seems to attract learned commentary. The Qur'an has sparked a huge body of commentary and explication. As discussed earlier, later Muslims did not always understand the Qur'an's Arabic, they did not catch allusions that were clear to early Muslims, and they were extremely concerned to reconcile apparent contradictions and conflicts in the Qur'an. Commentators glossed the Arabic, explained the allusions, and perhaps most importantly, decided which Quranic verses had been revealed early in Muhammad's prophetic career, as being appropriate to the very earliest Muslim community, and which had been revealed later, canceling out or ''abrogating'' the earlier text. Memories of the ''occasion of revelation'', the circumstances under which Muhammad had spoken as he did, were also collected, as they were believed to explain some apparent obscurities. For all these reasons, it was extremely important for commentators to explain how the Qur'an was revealed -- when and under what circumstances. Much commentary, or tafsir, was dedicated to history. The early tafsir are some of the best sources for Islamic history. Famous commentators include at-Tabari, az-Zamakhshari, at-Tirmidhi, and Ibn Kathir. (These classic commentaries usually include all common and accepted interpretations; modern fundamentalist commentaries like that written by Sayyed Qutb tend to advance only one of the possible interpretations.) Commentators feel fairly sure of the exact circumstances prompting some verses, such as surat Iqra, or many parts, including ayat 190-194, of surat al-Baqarah). In other cases (eg surat al-Asr), the most that can be said is which city the Prophet was living in at the time (dividing between Makkan sura and Madinan suras.) In some cases, such as surat al-Kawthar, the details of the circumstances are disputed, with different traditions giving different accounts. The most important external aid used in interpreting the meanings of the Qur'an is the hadith — the collection of traditions upon which Muslim scholars (the ulema) based Islamic history and law. Scholars sifted the many thousands of hadith, trying to discover which were true and which were fabrications. One method, extensively used, was a study of the chain of narrators, the isnad, by which the tradition had been passed. Note that, while certain hadith — the hadith qudsi — are claimed to record noncanonical words spoken by God to Muhammad, or the gist of them, Muslims do not consider these to form any part of the Qur'an. == 'Created' vs. 'uncreated' Qur'an == The most widespread varieties of Muslim theology consider the Qur'an to be eternal and 'uncreated'. Such an approach echoes Greek philosophy, especially Plato's theories that all ultimate realities and truths had to be eternal and unchanging. Given that Muslims believe that Biblical figures such as Moses and Jesus all preached Islam, the doctrine of an unchanging, uncreated revelation implies that contradictions between their statements according to the Qur'an and the Bible must be the result of human corruption of the earlier divine revelations. However, some, notably including the Mu'tazili and Ismaili sects, dispute this doctrine of the uncreated Qur'an. Various liberal movements within Islam implicitly or explicitly question the doctrine of the uncreated Qur'an when they address questions related to the application of Islamic law; some contemporary Muslim thinkers, such as Reza Aslan, have argued that such laws were created by God to meet the particular needs and circumstances of Muhammad's community. Among the many reasons the dissenting voices have offered for their critique of the doctrine of an eternal Qur'an has been its implications to the doctrine of tawhid, or unity of God. Holding that the Qur'an is the eternal uncreated speech of Allah, speech that has always existed alongside Him, seemed to some thinkers to be a step in the direction of a more plural concept of God's nature (which could lead to what Muslims consider the sin of ''Shirk (idolatry)'', the association of something with God). Concerned that this interpretation appeared to echo the Christian conception of God's eternal Word or logos, some Muslim philosophers and theologians rejected the notion of the Qur'an's eternality. == Qur'an recitation == The very word ''Qur'an'' is usually translated as "recital," indicating that it cannot exist as a mere text. It has always been transmitted orally as well as textually. To even be able to perform salat (prayer), a mandatory obligation in Islam, a Muslim is required to learn at least some suras of the Qur'an (typically starting with the first sura, al-Fatiha, known as the "seven oft-repeated verses," and then moving on to the shorter ones at the end). A person whose recital repertoire encompasses the whole Qur'an is called a qari' (قَارٍئ) or hafiz (which translate as "reciter" or "memorizer," respectively). Muhammad is regarded as the first hafiz. Cantillation (''tilawa'' تلاوة) of the Qur'an is a fine art in the Muslim world. ===Schools of recitation === There are several schools of Quranic recitation, all of which are permissible pronunciations of the Uthmanic rasm. Today ten canonical recitations of the Qur'an and four uncanonical exist. For a recitation to be canonical it must conform to three conditions: # It must match the rasm, letter for letter. # It must conform with the syntactic rules of the Arabic language. # It must have a continuous isnad to Prophet Muhammad through ''tawatur'', meaning that it has to be related by a large group of people to another down the isnad chain. Ibn Mujahid documented seven such recitations and Ibn Al-Jazri added three. They are: # Nafi` of Madina (169/785), transmitted by Warsh and Qaloon # Ibn Kathir (recitor) of Makka (120/737), transmitted by Al-Bazzi and Qonbul # Ibn `Amer of Damascus (118/736), transmitted by Hisham (narrator) and Ibn Zakwan # Abu `Amr of Basra (148/770), transmitted by Al-Duri and Al-Soosi # `Asim of Kufa (127/744), transmitted by Sho`bah and Hafs # Hamza (recitor) of Kufa (156/772), transmitted by Khalaf and Khallad # Al-Kisa'i of Kufa (189/804), transmitted by Abul-Harith and Al-Duri # Abu-Ja`far of Madina, transmitted by Ibn Wardan and Ibn Jammaz # Ya`qoob of Yemen, transmitted by Ruways and Rawh # Khalaf of Kufa, transmitted by Ishaaq (narrator) and Idris (narrator) These recitations differ in the vocalization (''tashkil'' تشكيل) of a few words, which in turn gives a complementary meaning to the word in question according to the rules of Arabic grammar. For example, the vocalization of a verb can change its active and passive voice. It can also change its Arabic_grammar#Verb formation, implying intensity for example. Vowels may be elongated or shortened, and glottal stops (hamzas) may be added or dropped, according to the respective rules of the particular recitation. For example, the name of archangel Gabriel is pronounced differently in different recitations: Jibrīl, Jabrīl, Jibra'īl, and Jibra'il. The name "Qur'ān" is pronounced without the glottal stop (as "Qurān") in one recitation, and prophet Abraham's name is pronounced Ibrāhām in another. The more widely used narrations are those of Hafs (حفص عن عاصم), Warsh (ورش عن نافع), Qaloon (قالون عن نافع) and Al-Duri through Abu `Amr (الدوري عن أبي عمرو). Muslims firmly believe that all canonical recitations were recited by the Prophet himself, citing the respective isnad chain of narration, and accept them as valid for worshipping and as a reference for rules of Sharia. The uncanonical recitations are called "explanatory" for their role in giving a different perspective for a given verse or ayah. Today several dozen persons hold the title "Memorizer of the Ten Recitations," considered to be the ultimate honour in the sciences of Qur'an. == The Qur'an and Islamic culture == Before touching a copy of the Qur'an, or mushaf, a Muslim performs wudu (ablution or a ritual cleansing with water) This is based on tradition and a literal interpretation of sura 56:77-79: "Most surely it is an honored Qur'an, in a book that is protected; none shall touch it save the purified ones." '''Qur'an desecration''' means insulting the Qur'an by defiling or dismembering it. Muslims must always treat the book with reverence, and are forbidden, for instance, to pulp, recycle, or simply discard worn-out copies of the text. (Such books must be respectfully burned or buried.) [http://www.ourdialogue.com/q4.htm] Respect for the written text of the Qur'an is an important element of religious faith by many Muslims. They believe that intentionally insulting the Qur'an is a form of blasphemy. According to the laws of some Muslim countries, blasphemy is punishable by lengthy imprisonment or even the death penalty. * See also: Qur'an desecration by US military == Writing and printing the Qur'an == Most Muslims today use printed versions of the Qur'an. There are Qur'ans for all tastes and pocketbooks, many in bi-lingual forms with the Arabic on one side and a gloss into a more familiar language on the other. Before printing was widely adopted, the Qur'an was transmitted by copyists and calligraphers. Since Muslim tradition felt that directly portraying sacred figures and events might lead to idolatry, it was forbidden to decorate the Qur'an with pictures (as was often done for Christian texts, for example). Muslims instead lavished love and care upon the sacred text itself. Arabic is written in many scripts, some of which are both complex and beautiful. Arabic calligraphy is a highly honored art, much like Chinese calligraphy. Muslims also decorated their Qur'ans with abstract figures (arabesques), colored inks, and gold leaf. Pages from some of these beautiful antique Qur'ans are displayed throughout this article. == Translation of the Qur'an == The Qur'an has been translated into many languages, but translations of the Qur'an from Arabic language to other languages are not considered by Muslims to be actual copies of the Qur'an, but rather are considered to be ''interpretive translations'' of the Qur'an; they are thus not given much weight in debates upon the Qur'an's meaning. In addition, as mere interpretive translations of the Qur'an, they are treated as ordinary books instead of being accorded the privileged status of ''Holy Books'' requiring special care. Robert of Ketton was the first to translate the Qur'an into Latin, in 1143. == See also == * Qur'an reading * Allah * Hadith * Hafiz * Islam * Muhammad * Sura == Literature == * A. J. Arberry, ''The Koran Interpreted'', Touchstone Books, 1996. ISBN 0684825074 * M. M. Al-Azami, ''The History of the Qur'anic Text from Revelation to Compilation'', UK Islamic Academy: Leicester 2003. * Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari, ''Jami al-bayan `an ta'wil al-Qur'an'', Cairo 1955-1969, transl. J. Cooper (ed.), ''The Commentary on the Qur'an'', Oxford University Press, 1987. ISBN 0199201420 * Ibn Warraq (ed.), ''The Origins of the Koran'', Prometheus Books, 1998. ISBN 157392198X * J. D. McAuliffe (ed.), ''Encyclopaedia of the Qur'an'', Brill, 2002-2004. * Fazlur Rahman, ''Major Themes in the Qur'an'', Bibliotheca Islamica, 1989. ISBN 0882970461 * Robinson, Neal, ''Discovering the Qur'an'', Georgetown University Press, 2002. ISBN 1589010248 * W. M. Watt and R. Bell, ''Introduction to the Qur'an'', Edinburgh University Press, 2001. ISBN 0748605975 * Jane Dammen McAuliffe, ''Quranic Christians : An Analysis of Classical and Modern Exegesis'', Cambridge University Press, 1991. ISBN 0521364701 *Barbara Freyer Stowasser, ''Women in the Qur'an, Traditions, and Interpretation'', Oxford University Press; Reprint edition (June 1, 1996), ISBN 0195111486 * Helmut Gatje, Alford T. Welch, ''The Qur'an and Its Exegesis'', Oneworld Publications; New Ed edition (November 1, 1996). ISBN 1851681183 *Hanna E. Kassis, ''A Concordance of the Qur'an,'' University of California Press (March 1, 1984), ISBN 0520043278 ==External links== ===Translations=== *[http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/ The Noble Qur'an] — three translations (Yusuf Ali, Shakir, and Picthal). Also, Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi's chapter introductions to the Qur'an *[http://www.thenoblequran.com The Noble Qur'an] — Translated by Dr.Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al Hilali, and Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan. A well-known English translation endorsed by the Saudi government. Includes Arabic commentary by Ibn Katheer, Tabari, and Qurtubi. * [http://www.submission.org/Q-T.html The Final Testament] — Translation by Rashad Khalifa, considered heretic and an apostate by the main corpus of Muslims. * [http://www.islamicity.com/multimedia/radio/ch152/default.asp?inc=1.htm Qur'anic Recitation with English Translation by Qari Muhammad Ayub, Spoken in English by J.D. Hall] *[http://www.tolueislam.com/Parwez/expo/exposition.htm Exposition of the Holy Qur'an] — by G. A. Parwez *[http://www.qaiu.org/archives/quran/the_qxp_project/index.html The Qur'an As It Explains Itself] — by The QXP Project == References == ===Search=== * [http://www.islamicity.com/QuranSearch/ Qur'an Search] Search English, Turkish, French, Spanish, Malay, German * [http://www.al-quran.org.uk/ The Qur'an Browser] * [http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/searchquran.html Qur'an Database] * [http://www.qurancomplex.org/ King Fahd Complex For The Printing Of The Holy Qur'an] (in Arabic, English, French, Urdu, Spanish, Indonesian and Hausa) === Tafsir (Commentary) === * [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Tafseer/Ulum/ Overview of Tafsir] * [http://www.tafsir.com/ Tafsir] by Ibn Kathir * [http://www.geocities.com/masad02/ The Message of the Qur'an] Translated and Explained by Muhammad Asad * [http://www.al-islam.org/al-mizan/v1/ Tafsir Al-Mizan by Allamah Tabatabai] * [http://www.tafheemulquran.org Tafheem-ul-Quran] by [http://www.abulala.com/shortbio.asp Maula Maududi] * [http://www.geocities.com/atif_nazir_2000/quran.xml Quran in XML] === Ulm (Qur'anic studies) === * [http://www.ymofmd.com/books/uaq/index.htm Ulum al Qur'an] by Ahmad von Denffer * [http://www.netnavigate.com/hasan/studyquran/ Ilm ul Qur'an] — by Hasanuddin Ahmad * [http://www.emuslim.com/Quran/Lughat.asp The Easy Dictionary of the Qur'an] Compiled By Shaikh AbdulKarim Parekh * [http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/M_four_term/index.html Four Basic Quranic Terms] by [http://www.abulala.com/shortbio.asp Maula Maududi] *[http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/KM_W2Q/index.htm Way To The Quran] by [http://www.youngmuslims.ca/biographies/display.asp?ID=11 Khurrum Murad] ===Audio/Video=== * [http://www.aswatalislam.net/CategorySelectionMadeP.aspx?CatID=1001 Complete Qur'an recitations by 271 different reciters] * [http://www.aswatalislam.net/CategorySelectionMadeP.aspx?CatID=1005 Four videos of recitation, commentary, or prayer] *[http://www.shaplus.com/free-quran-software/quran-mp3-software/QuranReciter/quran-mp3.htm Quran recitation MP3 files], for use in [http://www.shaplus.com/free-quran-software/quran-mp3-software/QuranReciter/quranreciter-free-download.htm recitation software] (Windows executable) ===Supporting views regarding Islamic traditions and the Qur'an=== *[http://members.aol.com/silence004/ Koran and Nature's Testimony] Articles and Books by Muhammad Asadi. * [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ Examining The Qur'an] Original articles responding to textual criticism. * [http://www.quranicstudies.com/ The Qur'anic Studies] *[http://www.ymofmd.com/books/tbqs/ The Bible, the Qur'an and Science] by Dr. Maurice Bucaille *[http://islamicity.com/Video/ch21_7B.ram Is the Qur'an the Word of God?] A video debate between Muslim/Christian apologists *[http://islamicity.com/Video/ch21_6B.ram The Authenticity of the Qur'an] A video debate between Muslim/Christian apologists *[http://www.el-haqq.com/Free_E-books/whowrote.pdf Who Wrote the Qur'an?] Analysis of the various theories from an Islamic viewpoint. *[http://www.irf.net/irf/download/index.htm Free Books on Various Topics and Deabtes] Verbatim Scripts of Dr. Zakir Naik's Lectures And Debates *[http://www.understanding-islam.com/related/text.asp?type=rarticle&raid=296&sscatid=66 Approaching Qur'an and Sunnah - Classical, Traditional and Progressive Methodologies] ===Skeptical views of Islamic traditions and the Qur'an=== * [http://answering-islam.org/Quran/Text/ Textual Variants of the Qur'an] *[http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/index.html The Skeptic's Annotated Qur'an] — a version of the Qur'an annotated from a skeptical point of view. *[http://www.rim.org/muslim/qurancrit.htm Radical New Views of Islam and the Origins of the Koran] *[http://www.secularislam.org/research/origins.htm The Origins of the Koran] ===Western academic discussion of the origins of the Qur'an=== *[http://www.truthnet.org/Islam/Watt/ W. M. Watt´s "Bell´s Introduction to the Qur'an" (online version)] *[http://syrcom.cua.edu/Hugoye/Vol6No1/HV6N1PRPhenixHorn.html Die syro-aramaeische Lesart des Koran; Ein Beitrag zur Entschlüsselung der Qur?ansprache] Review of Christoph Luxenberg's book * [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/luxreview2.html Die syro-aramäische Lesart des Koran: Ein Beitrag zur Entschlüsselung der Koransprache] Another Review by François de Blois, Journal of Qur'anic Studies, 2003, Volume V, Issue 1 *[http://theatlantic.com/issues/99jan/koran.htm What is the Koran?] The Atlantic Online ===Qur'anic manuscripts and calligraphy=== * [http://faculty.washington.edu/wheelerb/quran/quran_index.html Qur'an Manuscripts] * [http://www.qurancomplex.org/OldQuranImages/Default.asp?l=eng&CatLang=1&TabID=6&SubItemID=2&SecOrder=6&SubSecOrder=1 Qur'an Complex, Pictures of Manuscripts] *[http://www.islamicarchitecture.org/art/islamic-calligraphy.html Islamic Calligraphy] Quran bs:Kur'an fa:قرآن ms:Al-Quran simple:Qur'an su:Qur'an
Qur'an
Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page. Previous discussions: *Talk:Qur'an/Archive01: :1 Selected Quotes from the Qur'an || 2 Standardisation of the copies of the Qur'an || 3 Mathematical Miracles || 4 Contemporary Scholarship and the Qur'an || 5 Article not neutral || 6 Number of Verses in the Qur'an || 7 Qur'an graveyards || 8 Article not neutral at all || 9 Qur'an Usage || 10 Hafiz || 11 Sacred || 12 Arabic name || 13 Wikisource || 14 Suras || 15 PBUH || 16 Apologetic || 17 Samrkand Manuscript || 18 Created and UnCreated Debated || 9 Stylistic features || 20 Fairly minor edits || 21 Deuteronomy & John refs early in article || 22 Uncreated Qur'an (deletion of passage related to Bible) || 23 Added this link || 24 External links again || 25 Is that rearrangement OK? || 26 Removed commercial link || 27 I deleted a picture || 28 Ibn Kathir || 29 parts and subdivisions || 30 Recent additions to external links || 31 Textual criticism and the Qur'an - Clarification after removal || 32 Mary is not a prophet of Islam || 33 Can a Muslim editor check the Islamic links? || 34 Quran slavery Please add new sections and talk threads to the bottom of this page. ---- __TOC__ == Quran, Koran == Hi, I just replaced all of the references in articles (that weren't direct quotations) to "Koran" with references to "Qur'an". There are, however, a ton of articles that speak of the "Quran" without the "'". Does anyone think it matters to change them? And if so would people be willing to each do, say, 10 articles? [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Whatlinkshere&target=Quran Whatlinkshere&target=Quran] --User:Jacobolus 11:48, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC) : Nevermind. I switched them all --User:Jacobolus User_talk:jacobolus 03:36, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC) :Does anyone know why ''Koran'' is now the less-preferred spelling? Since it's a transliteration from a non-Roman alphabet, how does it matter? Is it something about being more phonetically closer? --User:JimWae 09:05, 2005 Mar 29 (UTC) ::I think the ' in Qur'an might represent a sound not shown in Koran? Is it Ayn? I forget :/ I moved that page to Slavery in the Qur'an since that is proper naming conventions and I am going to look through it since it seems... well, suspect. User:Grenavitar 20:42, 17 May 2005 (UTC) Actually it's NOT the preferred spelling - not in the general English-speaking world. The word ''Koran'' is a perfectly good alternative. It's in fact more often used and more easily recognized by the general public, which is after all the audience for this encyclopedia. I hope this isn't going to degenerate into another one of those "if you aren't one of us, you can't talk about us things" - ushered in via a name controversy. Try to transcend your own narrow grouping and think of a larger social unit than your own, can't ya? User:Ed Poor user talk:Ed Poor 22:53, May 24, 2005 (UTC) :Aw, Ed... it's a question of register (linguistics). The BBC uses "Koran" in its news reports and "Qur'an" in its background documents. The Britannica, in its scholarly encyclopaedic articles, uses Qur'ān. Us here, hamstrung by character set issues and walking a narrow line, well, we use Qur'an. ([http://www.thedigitalcourier.com/articles/2005/05/24/news/news01.txt These guys], of course, are using their 1st amendment rights.) User:Hajor 00:02, 25 May 2005 (UTC) == "Entitites and events ... confirmed by science..." == Re: ::Some Muslims claim that the Quran contains much information about entities and events that has been confirmed by science and technology many years after the Qur'an was revealed, and take this to constitute further evidence that the Qur'an is indeed the true, eternal word of God. ... though I most powerfully and potently believe, I hold it not Wikipedia to have it thus set down. Hard to imagine defending a description along these lines of any other religious text, and I foresee a series of editorial conflicts on the impossible-to-resolve-objectively question of whether this sentence is justified by specific Qur'anic passages, and if so, which ones. Waste of time, and certainly such predictive passages, as remarkable as they are, are are not central to Islamic theology. (Placement of this passage in the article, however, suggests to the contrary.) May I vote for deletion? User:BrandonYusufToropov 14:35, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC) == Qur'an appearance == The page should have something about how the Quran looks on the outside and how/why it is highly decorated == Qur'an desecration == I put SectNPOV because what schools of Islamic law state this? We cannot just say "Islamic law says" is this Shia (which major imams)? Sunni (which major madhhabs? and if you could cite sources that say this. We cannot just get away with saying "Islamic law says" and we do that far too often. User:Grenavitar 20:35, 17 May 2005 (UTC) :No argument from me; I just wanted to consolidate all the Guantánamo material into one single article. I'm looking forward to seeing the experts come in and clear the point up. User:Hajor 20:55, 17 May 2005 (UTC) :Clearer now (see below), yes? I'm removing SectNPOV. User:BrandonYusufToropov 00:13, 18 May 2005 (UTC) === Rulings on handling Qur'an === http://www.geocities.com/~abdulwahid/muslimarticles/adaab_quran.html http://www.themodernreligion.com/basic/quran/etiquette.html http://www.sunnah.org/msaec/articles/respecting_quran.htm Use of derogatory remarks, etc; in respect of the Holy Prophet. Whoever by words, either spoken or written or by visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine. — Pakistan Penal code: Offenses relating to religion: Section: 295-C === DISRESPECT TO THE NOBLE QUR'AN === Hadhrat Úmar (Radhiallaahu Anhu) narrates that Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) said, 'Allah exalts many people by means of this book (Qur'an) and He also degrades and disgraces many others by means of the same.' (Muslim) Hadhrat Jaabir (Radhiallaahu Anhu) reports that Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) said, 'The Qur'an is such an interceder whose intercession is accepted, and a disputant whose dispute is upheld. Whoever keeps it in front of him, it draws him to Jannat, and whoever puts it behind his back, it hurls him into Jahannam.' In the light of the above Ahaadith, we learn that the position of the Noble Qur'an is exceptionally high by Allah Ta'aala. Therefore, it is essentially important for Muslims to show full respect, love and devotion for the Noble Qur'an. Insha Allah, in doing so Allah Ta'aala will elevate us in this world and in the Hereafter. It is mentioned that once a person who was a great sinner had found a piece of paper on the floor on which an Aayaat of the Qur'an Majeed was written. He picked it up and showed respect to it. Allah Ta'aala was so pleased with this act in showing respect to His words that Allah Ta'aala forgave him. Unfortunately, today the true love and respect for the words of Allah Ta'aala is lacking. We notice today that countless number of pamphlets with Qur'anic Aayaats are distributed as though they were some cheap cinema handbills, which so often end up on pavements, or filthy public toilets. Collection tins with Qur'anic Aayaats are placed in Kuffaar shops and handled by them. Muslims are prohibited from touching even one Aayaat of the Noble Qur'an without Tahaarah but alas the words of Allah Ta'aala have now become a cheap calendar decoration which after one year is thrown into the bins. We earnestly plead to all Muslims, "Please do not print, buy or sell stickers, booklets, calendar pamphlets, etc. with Qur'anic Aayaats on them as we will be assisting in showing disrespect to the words of Allah Ta'aala." May Allah make the Noble Qur'an a means of our guidance and make it an interceder in our favour on the day of Qiyaamat, Aameen. -- Jamiatul Ulama''' :Those are good sources for modern viewing of the issue I suppose, I think there is another side that isn't so strict that might deserve to be shown. I am wary of having Wikipedia just reflect Dawa books and not better scholarship. I think we could use classical views as well. User:Grenavitar 22:02, 17 May 2005 (UTC) ::Just as relevant (perhaps more so) is the popular insistence on the Qur'an's special status. This may give you a sense of the depth of feeling: http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2003-10/21/article07.shtml === Sunni ruling on desecration of Qur'an === (yes, it's that serious dept:) It is necessary to have evidence of two reliable witnesses corroborating each other before a Khazi (judge) shall be required to question the witnesses. Thereupon the witnesses will have to make statements describing the words uttered or the acts done which constitute apostasy. Apostasy can be committed in two ways: (1) by uttering expressly by tongue that he is (or has become) a Mushrik , a polytheist (i.e. one who associates others with the One God and considers them to be worthy of worship) or, by saying something which is bound to connote in its meaning a denial of the existence of God, for instance to say that God has corporeal (physical, material) existence just like any other corporeal object, or (2) by the performance of an act in which one cannot avoid the clear conclusion that it is tantamount to 'kufr' (infidelity, denial of Islam), '''for example, to throw away with contempt the holy Qur'an or any part of it or even a single word of it; or to throw it in the fire in an insulting, contemptuous manner; or to throw it in such a place as a garbage dump where there are filthy, dirty and repulsive things; or in a spittoon etc. These acts would be blasphemous and constitute apostasy.''' - from 'Abd al-Rahman Jaziri, Urdu translation, Munzur Ahsan Abbasi, Kitab al-fiqh Ala' al-Madahib al-Arba'ah, Lahore, Pakistan, Ulama Academy, 1985 :You have quoted a boatload of information now help to integrate it into the article and don't blanket "Islamic law says" give the sources of who says it like you listed for me, but in a manageable form for the article. It's not an issue of do I believe you or not, it's an issue of that section has a severe modern traditional Sunni POV and therefore you can quote or cite the texts in the article that lead you to what it says. Wikipedia:Cite sources this is what I'm talking about... not every Muslim makes the claim that you can't throw out a Qur'an... or that you have to have performed Wudu first what you imply there is that every single Muslim carries the exact same view on this issue. User:Grenavitar 02:12, 18 May 2005 (UTC) ::Gren, if you think a specific citation is important, why don't you take a pass at integrating some of the material I have provided here into the article, since it's your query, ok? ::The fact of its illegality is certainly not disputed, though, so please do not put that header back in the section. ::Before you edit: Let's think twice before adding an "on-the-one-hand-on-the-other-hand" mini-series to this article. The practice is universally condemned by jurists and the vast majority of Muslims, as I have set out above. ::It's like saying the Constitution mandates due process. ("Hmmm... Can you cite a recent Supreme Court decision specifically confirming that point, please? Do ALL politicians believe in due process? Surely not every American citizen makes the claim that due process is required in legal proceedings -- what about the minority view that it's a pain in the neck and not worth the bother?") User:BrandonYusufToropov 09:39, 18 May 2005 (UTC) :::The root of this is saying, "Islamic law states". There is no "Islamic law" that rules all Muslims, there are various attempts at jurisprudence and they may agree (and on this issue they do agree that it's bad to destroy... and to a lesser extent that you ''must'' have performed wudu or you are an apostate if you destroy. But, to say Islamic law states, is an untrue statement that is trying to cut off any others and place the mainstream as "the true Islam" and here on wikipedia there is only what most people believe... none of them are true or false. So, you have what most people believe, don't make it seem like it is the only view. User:Grenavitar 19:58, 18 May 2005 (UTC) ==An ex-soldier's POV== For what it's worth, I was a US soldier for five years. I don't think ANY holy scripture should be desecrated. If interrogators can't get info from recalcitrant prisoners by nice treatment (or even rough treatment), so be it. One of the best psychological weapons of war is to release POWs from time to time, and let them tell TRUE stories of how fairly they were treated. This is the best way to demoralize political opposition to one's campaign. The opposing campaign can't play the human rights card. In the Vietnamese War, the tiger cages of the south were: *violations of human rights, and thus despicable in and of themselves *a stupid and impractical PR mistake I won't say which is worse, but after the war, the winning side massacred half a million people, so draw your own conclusions. I believe we are all responsible for what we do. So we should do GOOD things, which benefit others. (Like the Koran says, right?) User:Ed Poor user talk:Ed Poor 16:14, May 18, 2005 (UTC) :hear, hear. not very on-topic here, of course, but I am glad to be reminded that there are fair soldiers on either side. As a fair soldier, though, I imagine I would be all the more angry with the fools, or worse than fools, that bring shame to my own side. User:Dbachmann User_talk:Dbachmann 08:30, 19 May 2005 (UTC) ::I'm sure the same sentiments would be expressed by a good percentage of the (remaining sane members of the) US intelligence community. To descend from ethical questions and issues of shame, down to the merely pragmatic level, this is apparently a really lousy way of gathering intelligence. If your goal, however, is the suicidal one of unifying the civilian populace against your campaign ... this is probably the very best way to go. User:BrandonYusufToropov 19:13, 19 May 2005 (UTC) :You have made too many assumptions here: ''remaining sane members'', ''this is probably the very best way''. I can only guess at your meaning. :Are you criticizing the intelligence community, i.e., they'd have to be crazy to do X? And are you assuming that Koran desecration was a prescribed tactic the interrogators used? :Sigh. That's they problem with a lot of liberals. They're so into their point of view, they assume all their readers share it. User:Ed Poor user talk:Ed Poor 20:25, May 23, 2005 (UTC) ::Was I assuming the desecration was a prescribed tactic the interrogators used? Given the number of different times it has shown up on the record... yeah. (Did you read the article you cited as Koran desecration?) ::You're under the assumption, presumably, that the multiple reports of this desecration are the result of: ::a) stark coincidence ::b) a conspiracy on the part of the media (which has somehow turned curiously obedient in the past week and a half) :::and/or ::c) delusional behavior on the part of the Red Cross, which took the extraordinary step of outing the White House by ''publicly'' citing a pattern of disrespect toward the Qur'an. ::If you opt for a), presumably you believe it was also a coincidence that personnel at Gitmo stripped people naked (so they couldn't pray clothed, as required by Islamic law) and deprived them of water with which to perform wudu (also required by Islamic law). Lots of complaints about these things. How many coincidences are you willing to ignore? When is a bad apple the product of a bad tree? Where did these non-Muslim interrogators get all this information about which actions, precisely, would inflame and degrade Muslims? The Weekly World News? ::Do I think the intelligence community was crazy to undertake this? No. "Stupid" is the word I would choose. "Crazy" would exempt them from moral accountability. ::Nobody wants to believe his country does bad things. That desire to imagine the best in our nation, however, does not prove our country is innocent when evidence points to the contrary. User:BrandonYusufToropov 01:13, 24 May 2005 (UTC) You left out (d) mischief-making by the prisoners or their friends outside: just make an accusation, then sit back and watch the fur fly. You seem to reagard the captured enemy fighters at Gitmo as being as innocent as the falsely accused banker in ''The Shawshank Redemption''. Did it ever occur to you that someone might lie about the US to gain a PR advantage? Or have the enemies of freedom taken a secret oath always to tell the truth? (Lying and murder usually go hand and hand, wake up.) User:Ed Poor user talk:Ed Poor 20:00, May 24, 2005 (UTC) ::Are you seriously suggesting that each and every one of the following reports was the result of a propensity for boyish pranks? ::* n 2003, an Afghan former prisoner told the Washington Post that U.S. soldiers tormented him by throwing the Koran in the toilet.[4] (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/13/AR2005051301377.html) :: * The BBC reported on December 30, 2004 that the former Guantánamo prisoner Abdallah Tabarak maintained that "American soldiers used to tear up copies of the Koran and throw them in the toilet." :: * In a book review dated January 16, 2005, the Hartford Courant reported that five British detainees, after their release, claimed that they "had seen other prisoners sexually humiliated, had been hooded, and were forced to watch copies of the Koran being flushed down toilets." (Compare: Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse) :: * The Philadelphia Inquirer reported on January 20, 2005 that there were complaints concerning guards who had "defaced their copies of the Koran and, in one case, had thrown it in a toilet." :: * The Miami Herald reported on March 6, 2005 that three Guantánamo captives — Fawzi al Odah, 27, Fouad al Rabiah, 45, and Khalid al Mutairi, 29 — "separately complained to their lawyer that military police threw their Korans into the toilet." :: * The Miami Herald also reported on March 9, 2005 that Guantánamo Base staff insulted Allah and "threw Korans into toilets." :: * The New York Times reported on May 1, 2005 that "Mr. al-Mutairi said ... a protest of guards' handling of copies of the Koran, which had been tossed into a pile and stepped on, a senior officer delivered an apology over the camp's loudspeaker system, pledging that such abuses would stop." :: * Credible reports also arose that "in August 2003, 23 Yemeni detainees reportedly tried to commit mass suicide after a guard stomped on the Koran." ::http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/18/1434259 ::'''I respectfully disagree that with your contention that these and other mainstream reports of Qur'an desecration were individual, coincidental instances of "mischief-making" meant to allow bored servicement to "watch the fur fly" -- and I simply cannot believe that my reasons for disagreeing are not yet clear to you. ::I would reiterate to you that the Red Cross, about which you have been curiously silent, does not normally go public and blow the whistle on governments. It has, as a matter of public record, done so in this case. Someone was giving orders. The Red Cross intervened (successfully) in order to stop those orders. User:BrandonYusufToropov 21:00, 24 May 2005 (UTC) :False dichotomy. It's not an either-or. You assume that either (a) all the reports were made up or (b) none of them was made up. See excluded middle. :Look , I can tell you're pissed off about something. But your assumption that the anti-US forces are the good guys and would not lie, is childish - even petulant. :None of which has anything to do with an article about the Holy Koran. Or about actually following its precepts. My Iraqi-American friend has a lot to say about this sort of hypocrisy. Just get real, okay? User:Ed Poor user talk:Ed Poor 23:09, May 24, 2005 (UTC) :On further reflection, I'd rather not use Wikipedia as a forum to debate which of us can claim the moral high ground. Let's try to fix the mess together, instead of wasting time blaming one another. User:Ed Poor user talk:Ed Poor 23:15, May 24, 2005 (UTC) ::Works for me. User:BrandonYusufToropov 09:41, 25 May 2005 (UTC) It was aired tomorrow on ARY one world ( A Pakistani private news channel ), an interview with a Pakistani released from Goantanamo . He said this Quran desecration stuff has been going on for a long time . It happened at Baghram ( Afghanistan )too . The US soldiers used to throw Quran in human feces buckets . Though he also said that some of the solders who did this with Quran did the same with Bible too . May be it was few solders , may be the whole intelligence , I dont know . Important thing is that Americans should understand that the more they do stuff like that , the more they create people like OBL . There R many muslim countries that R trying their best not to create another one of his kind . But then how to stop Americans . They made the first OBL ( I wonder how many people in US actually know this ) , & they R doing their best to create more of his kind . User:Farhansher 20:54, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
Qur'án
#REDIRECT Qur'an
Qur'ân
#redirect Qur'an
See other meanings of words starting from letter:A | B | C | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | R | S | T | U | V | X | Y | Z |
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
