|↓||Skip to table of contents||↓|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Quran article.|
|Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11|
|The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Please supply full citations when adding information, and consider tagging or removing unciteable information.|
|Please be neutral when editing this highly sensitive article. It discusses a topic about which people have diverse opinions.|
|This is not a forum for general discussion about Quran. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Quran at the Reference desk, discuss relevant Wikipedia policy at the Village pump, or ask for help at the Help desk.|
|Discussions on this page may escalate into heated debate. Please try to keep a cool head when commenting here. See also: Wikipedia:Etiquette.|
|Quran has been listed as a level-3 vital article in Philosophy. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as B-Class.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|To-do list for Quran:|
Can you please add the following (or a summary of it) to the meaning of the word Quran:
Al-Quran القرءان literally means "The Readable" despite being encrypted.
Al-Quran is divided into chapters called Sura سورة or a perimeter surrounding an exclusion zone (of text). Each chapter is further subdivided into verses called Aya ءاية or revelation as indivisible units of encrypted readable cipher text. Chapters have different number of verses which seem to encode the abundance ratios of the 113 chemical elements in nature  as well as forming the amazing symmetrical table shown at [] (full table). Similarly, verses have different lengths ranging from few letters [42:2] to a full page [2:282] but never split across pages. Verses can contain partial sentences, full sentences or multiple sentences that could be unrelated if the sentences were revealed at different times but compiled together into a single verse [5:3].
Al-Quran is a multi-layer encrypted book of hidden knowledge which is protected by God Almighty inside a protective shell (مكنون) similar to eggs or pearls as per the following verses:
37:49 كأنهن بيض مكنون as if eggs hidden inside protective shells
52:24 كأنهم لؤلؤ مكنون as if pearls hidden inside protective shells
56:23 كأمثل ٱللؤلؤ ٱلمكنون As if pearls hidden inside protective shells
56:77 انه لقرءان كريم It is indeed a generous Quran
56:78 في كتب مكنون In a book that is hidden inside a protective shell
56:79 لا يمسه الا المطهرون No one reaches it except the purified in [33:33]
God > infinity
Can you please add the following line, under the definition?
4:82 وَلَوْ كَانَ مِنْ عِندِ غَيْرِ ٱللَّهِ لَوَجَدُواْ فِيهِ ٱخْتِلاَفاً كَثِيراً If it had been from [any] other than Allah , they would have found within it much contradiction. Veyselperu (talk) 07:28, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
Suggest remove it.
The quoted text above is in the section titled 'Miracle'. The last reference (No. 53) refers to a book called The End of Faith by Sam Harris. Sam Harris is not considered, has never been considered or recognised as a 'scholar of Islamic History' in the relevant academic circle. His works do not deal with Islamic history. He has not written any book that solely deals with the history of Islam. No book has ever written by him that intends to deal with Islamic History. If he is in fact a scholar of Islamic history he has concealed it very well and has done everything to not give the secret away.
-reply from another user - what exactly is your issue with the part you quoted above, about "produce a surah like it"? It is true. And it is written in the quran. And it is true that all muslims who try to prove the quran to be from God, do say this sentence all the time. And so it is completely true that muslims use those quran verses in that way. To challenge people to produce a surah like it, and then judge the meeting of this challenge, as something which makes the quran true or not. Even though it does not logically prove the quran to be true, but is just a silly trick to fool people into feeling secure, when they didn't actually prove it is true either. So no it should not be removed. Unless you want to hide the truth. - end of reply -.
"Muslim tradition agrees that although the Qur’an was authentically memorized completely by tens of thousands verbally; the Qur’an was still established textually into a single book form shortly after Muhammad's death by order of the first Caliph Abu Bakr suggested by his future successor Umar."
suggest replacing the semicolon with a comma to correct grammatical error.
are many many people who have memorized the ten recitations, not just several dozen.
Having already rejected the religion of those Meccans who encouraged the worship of many gods, Muhammad spent much of his time contemplating the oneness of God. During a state of inner reflection, Muhammad reported hearing a loud, commanding voice cry, "Iqra!" (the Arabic word for "read"). The voice said the word a second time. Believing that he was alone in the cave, Muhammad became frightened. Nonetheless, he cried out, "I am not one of those who can read!" According to Muhammad, he was then lifted, embraced, and let go as the voice again ordered, "Iqra!" Muhammad replied just as he had done moments earlier. When the command came again, he responded by asking, "What shall I read?" This time, as the voice spoke the words, he repeated them, reciting what Muslims believe is the First Revelation and the beginning of Surah 96 of the Qur'an.
Isaiah 29;12 And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.
Isaiah 28:10-13 - For precept [must be] upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, [and] there a little: For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people To whom he said, This [is] the rest [wherewith] ye may cause the weary to rest; and this [is] the refreshing: yet they would not hear. But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, [and] there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.
The Quran was revealed in stages over the course of 23 years, some verses in one city, others in another.
Isaiah 51:4 Hearken unto me, my people; and give ear unto me, O my nation: for a law shall proceed from me, and I will make my judgment to rest for a light of the people.
No other Prophet after Moses brought their own law and followed the Law of Moses, this verse is in Isaiah, who came after Moses, giving tidings of a new law to come.
Jeremiah 31:33 But this [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. The entire Quran with all it's laws and injunctions, was and is committed to memory by millions of people around the world.
Hosea 2:23 And I will sow her unto me in the earth; and I will have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy; and I will say to [them which were] not my people, Thou [art] my people; and they shall say, [Thou art] my God.
Can you please add the following line, under Recent Translations? Talal Itani (2012) THE QURAN – A Modern English Translation. ClearQuran Publishing. ISBN 978-1467948746
Section 3: Significance in Islam. Penultimate paragraph, 2nd sentence. TYPOS: Muslism => Muslims 'a they' => 'they'
|Threads older than 3 months may be archived by.|
Koran Forbids Muslims From Traveling Beyond the Mediterranean
I took an American History class not long ago that used a text authored by Jill Lepore, Encounters in the New World, A History in Documents, copyright 2000, ISBN 0-19-515491-6. On pages 14 and 15, in a discussion concerning who discovered the New World and why, it states that Arabian sailors and Muslims were forbidden by the Koran from leaving the Mediterranean region and that's why they never reached the Americas. I would suppose this directive means anywhere West of Israel, North of North Africa, South of Italy, and East of Spain. But this is guesswork as Ms. Lepore never responded to an attempted contact, and the text doesn't reference chapter and verse for the quotation, which really it isn't as it simply states that Muslim sailors never discovered America as they were prohibited from leaving the Mediterranean. I suppose this doesn't specifically mean that North Africans and Middle Easterners are banned from emigration, it just means that the Koran forbids Islam from leaving the Mediterranean.
Anyone know where in the Koran this is? Any English translation anywhere? Should this be included in the main article? It would be relevant to 21st Century Muslim expansion into the world, as (unless there's been changes to the Koran or its directives) Islam is still confined to its original boundaries. That's what it says in Lepore's text, anyway.--22.214.171.124 (talk) 02:39, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
- Sounds highly dubious, given that the Arabian peninsula is not in the "Mediterranean region" and Islam spread to Persia and India within decades of Muhammad's death. Then muslim merchants helped it spread to what is now Indonesia and the East African coast. DeCausa (talk) 13:01, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
- I saw this, too. It may concern how far inland the Koran allows Islamists to travel from the Med. Moorish Spain might be a good example; some Moorish cities were far inland. And, an inventive Muslim traveler could always circumvent Koran directives by carrying a canteen or gourd (whatever the era) of Mediterranean water with him; he would never be far from it. The question appears to be what the Koran really says. If it does say that Muslims are required to remain in the Mediterranean geographic region, then that is important enough to warrant its inclusion in the main article once chapter and verse has been determined.--126.96.36.199 (talk) 16:04, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
This claim is obviously baseless, there isn't any expression in Quran about Mediterranean. Instead, you can refer to this verse "And to Allah belongs the east and the west. So wherever you [might] turn, there is the Face of Allah." (Quran 2:115) Veyselperu (talk) 05:34, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
- No, instead you can refer to the author and ask her for her sources. This is more than just a minor quibble, this is from a text used in American colleges. If this is a baseless insertion in a textbook, then Americans are being taught fallacies about Islam. And, the text references the Med "region," which might not specifically name the Mediterranean itself. The student is led to believe that it does, however, as it references Islamic sailors.
- Another example of American college texts: In another History class a passage referenced an ancient battle between two Moslem forces at Siffat. One Moslem force tore pages from their Koran(s) and placed them upon their lances so that their foes could see that they were Moslems. I showed this to my co-workers, as I believed that an exhibition like this would have been met with hostility due to mutilation of a Koran. My co-workers said that they doubted that something like this could have happened, as the prohibition against mutilating a Koran is time-honored.
- These are two examples of what Americans are taught in schools, two examples that modern Muslims might not agree with. If there is hostility towards American's misunderstanding of Islamic traditions, it may not be from the American's deliberate actions. It may be from what they read. And I'll include this second text's ISBN as soon as I find it.
- And if you are correct, you should have Quran 2:115 placed in the main article yourself. It is not for my reference alone, it's for all those who are curious about what the Koran teaches.188.8.131.52 (talk) 01:43, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Since Lepore is not a specialist on Islam or Islamic history, the claim should be treated as WP:FRINGE until a better source is found. I don't think it should be in the article at all until then. Zerotalk 02:19, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
- She does seem to be considered a "specialist" on world history, judging by her position and credentials. It's also evident that she has been published and her texts are used in higher education institutions. Her credentials are verified. What she inserts into her text material may not catch the eye of all the students who buy her texts. I mean, really, a small passage in a fairly large textbook, who'd notice?
- But it's there, and attacking her worthiness isn't the answer to this specific question. Rather, the identification of her source(s) is. If it is valid, then this information is important enough to warrant its inclusion in the main article. If it's false, then many students who use her educational aids really need a refund.
- There's really more at question here than just the Koran's passage, true or not. Tuition's rising in America, it's getting expensive to go to college. Those college graduates who enter politics or other fields that require contact with foreign powers or peoples should be expected to have a firm grasp of who and what they're dealing with. If their education is flawed, then their conduct with those persons could be quite flawed, also, and cause friction.
- The Battle of Siffin, not Siffat. The textbook is The West, Encounters and Transformations, Vol. 1 by Brian Levack and a couple others. The ISBN is 0-321-27632-9. Islam is discussed in Chapter 7, and Siffin is on pages 148 and 149.
- The text specifically states on page 148 that the battle ended in July, 657 when Muawiya's forces tore pages out of a Koran and "...held up pages of the Qu'ran on the ends of their spears and appealed for arbitration." Now, compare that with the Wikipedia chronicling of the battle. On the Siffin page the only mention of a Koran being used as a tool for mediation is: "Suddenly one of the Syrians, Ibn Lahiya, reportedly out of dread of the fitna and unable to bear the spectacle rode forward with a copy of the Quran on the ears of his horse to call for judgement by the book of Allah, and the other Syrians followed suit." That's a far cry from tearing a Koran to shreds and skewering its pages on spears. One source says desecration, another no defilement unless the horse's ears were dirty.
- Is this important? I believe so as it demonstrates how history becomes distorted according to the source. This is a prime example, there's no better. This aptly illustrates how one people can enrage another without even knowing that they are acting aggressively. Americans are taught in their colleges that Moslems once believed that tearing a Koran to shreds and showing the remains to opposing Moslems would placate the others into peace, yet on an international encyclopedia no mention of that is made, the Koran is simply used as a horse's hat and the opposition is gladdened to see its holy book used to shield the beast from the sun.
- Times change, and now with the Internet so does history. Anyone want to change the Battle of Siffin page?--184.108.40.206 (talk) 11:50, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Would an Established User Please Help
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
The closing paragraph in the article (paragraph one) is quite misleading, and relies on an apparent misunderstanding from its author. The factual challenge presented is that there is no second copy/version/publication of the Quran in existence. If one exists, then where?
Even between the various sects in Islam, there's no debate on whether or not certain verses or chapters have been revealed in The Quran. The debate between sects stems from differing interpretation on how to apply those verses. While factually "the oldest copy of The Quran" is disputed and shall probably remain a scientific mystery, all copies of the Quran that have been carbon-dated (such as the Samarkan Kufic Quran, and "Sana'a Manuscripts," not to mention various artefacts, including swords, bones, rocks, just to name a few) are not only an exact match in the verbiage used within their respective chapters to the modern-day wide-spread 'Uthmaani Quraan; many of the artefacts date as far back as to the century in which "Prophet Muhammad" lived. Hence, when referring to "The Quran," whether or not you believe it was "revealed by God;" or whether or not someone were to write their own version (an abridgement, a cult novel, manuscript, or otherwise) with the same name, that do not scientifically pre-date the known "originals," all historical facts and scientific policies, thus-far, indicate that "The Quran" that Muslims believe to be "The Unchanged Word of God," has not yet been altered since its revelation 1400+ years ago. Most logical debaters agree that without scientific backing, counter arguments can only be labelled as baseless rhetoric.
Further Research & Reading If we are to speak about historical figures and authorities on the topic, The Quran (as the article outlines) means recitation; henceforth, by definition, the most accurate depiction of the Quran is the memorized version, as passed from generation to generation, over the past 1400+ years. The Quraan as written by Abdullah ibn Al-Zubair during its revelation, and gathered in the same century by 'Uthmaan ibn 'Afaan (as historically recorded in every major Islamic Text including Sahih Al-Bukhaari, and Sahih Muslim), has been memorized by many of "Prophet Muhammad's" companions, (including "Abdullah Ibn 'Abaas and Ibn Mas'ood from whom Prophet Muhammad had recommended to "pay attention to..." as relayed in Sahih Al-Bukhaari). Those who claim to have memorized the Quran must recite it in its totality, correctly, in the same manner that the Prophet Muhammad had recited it, and receive something called an Ijaazah (or verification). While the standard for those whom can issue an "Ijaazah" seems wide-open, the science of reciting The Quran has quite literally been documented letter-by-letter and vowel-by-vowel; henceforth, newly-invented methods or simple mispronunciations can be immediately refuted with textual evidence. The literary writings of Ibn-Al-jazari in his famous poem Al-Jazariah (in which he describes the Hafs-'an-Asim recitation of The Quran) is an example of a literary work that describes proper recitation vowel-by-vowel. Other literary works are numerous, and can be found in abundance in many libraries world-wide, including the oldest known university in the world (Al-Azhar University in Cairo Egypt), and Madinah University Library, Saudi Arabia. Moslem Al-Moslem (talk) 03:35, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. I can't make out what it is that you would like to change about the article. The last sentence in the first paragraph is sourced and appears uncontroversial, but are you claiming that the source does not support the claim? What text would you substitute and what sources would you provide to support the new text? Please re-open the request when you reply. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 05:23, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2014
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
I write this in relation to a search i carried out online. I type in the word Quran and was lead to you wiki page; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quran. I was appalled that instead of a picture relating to the quran, there was an image/painting of a human back and buttocks. I would be grateful if this can be looked into urgently as the topic is regarding a holy book and I am appalled that this is the image that has been depicted. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 01:04, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
- It was vandalism done to a template used in the article. I apologize for the offence it caused. --NeilN talk to me 01:12, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2014
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
− I wanted to add link in the browser and sites for Quran. just wanted to add GlobalQuran.com - Quran very first API provider since 2006.
There is a citation needed for this line in the compilation portion of this article:
The Quran in its present form is generally considered by academic scholars to record the words spoken by Muhammad because the search for variants has not yielded any differences of great significance.
Here is the source: http://books.google.com/books?id=c6hAAQAAIAAJ&q=%22+generally+considered+by+academic+scholars+to+record+the+words+spoken+by+Prophet+Muhammad%22&dq=%22+generally+considered+by+academic+scholars+to+record+the+words+spoken+by+Prophet+Muhammad%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=6tgGU5v9F6Kf2QXL1YGoAw&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA
Would someone add it? Thanks
- Is that a reliable source (WP:RS)? It does not seem like Edwin E. Hitti has any reputation as an expert on Quranic textual criticism or early Islamic history. And, for example, the Donner source cited seems to say the opposite (Donner 2006, p. 31–33). --Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 05:33, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
It seems as though it is a reliable source because Edwin E. Hitti has authored many books on Islam. He is a keynote speaker at many events and has reputable knowledge about islam.
This book seems to have his background in the first two pages of the preview.