Jump to content

Talk:Muqattaʿat

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hebrew

[edit]

Ani Lo Meamin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.252.254.29 (talk) 02:10, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And that means...? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.203.222.74 (talk) 04:24, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nun (ن) symbolizing "fish" identifying the sura dedicated to Jonah, or Ta (ط) representing "serpent"
These are the meanings of the names of the same letters (Nun and Teth) in the original Phoenician alphabet.
Nuttyskin (talk) 23:36, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The mumbled alphabet rather. No th so have to do with t (TA). See proto-semitic inventory. 128.206.16.115 (talk) 06:02, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Layton, in a translation of the new Nag Hammadi text about Nun the twisted serpent, writes that Nun is a primordial entity with Symbol N and serpent. [The Gnostic Scriptures/ Bentley Layton, David Brakke/ 2021/ pp. 220, 225-6.] The fish is an incomplete meaning for Nun and if we accept the sea serpent then the letter N in the first verse of Al-Qalam will be deciphered clearly, which correlates Ibn Abbas's narrations. There is more pieces of evidence that attest Nun as a sea serpent, and links it to clear meanings about the first stage of creation, if you are interested just inform us. Keturah.Nun (talk) 20:49, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad-Baqir

[edit]

I have read that the fifth Imam composed a commentary on the disconnected letters, and that he performed arithmetic on their numerical values; can anyone add to this? J S Ayer (talk) 14:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

meaningful word

[edit]

In the Arabic language, these letters are written together like a word, but each letter is pronounced separately. None of these combinations actually form a meaningful Arabic word.

alam? (like surat al fil) --99.245.206.188 (talk) 03:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One letter is written in two styles. [Refer 19:01 and 20:01]

[edit]

Please tell us: which letter (and where) and what the difference in "style" is

or delete the mysterious statement.--85.178.69.199 (talk) 04:24, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Research

[edit]

I've no problem with having a paragraph on Christoph Luxenberg's theory but only if someone actually describes what it is. Since no explanation of the theory is given on the page such a link should not be presented as a part of the body of the article. M-Henry (talk) 23:05, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can it be that the letters were monograms of the persons accordind to whom the surahs were compiled? Since there were many ways and opinions to arrange verses into chapters, the scholars who wrote the first Koran added references that indicated the version of each surah that was then considered to be the best version. There is an evident Biblical comparison, i.e. "This gospel is according to james..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.136.44.107 (talk) 08:18, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mathematical Structure based on 19 [74:30] within Initialled Suras (Chapter with Muqatta'at)

[edit]

Peace be upon you all,

God Willing I intend adding following within the "Modern Research" section, further substantiating the understanding on Muqatta'at as presented by Dr. Rashad Khalifa.

1. The total of the 29 sura numbers where the Quranic Initials occur is 2+3+7+...+50+68 = 822, and 822+14 (14 sets of initials) equals 836, or 19 x 44.

2. 14 different Arabic letters, form 14 different sets of "Quranic Initials" (such as A.L.M. of 2:1), and prefix 29 suras. These numbers add up to 14+14+29 = 57= 19 x 3.

3. Between the first initialed sura (Sura 2) and the last initialed sura (Sura 68) there are 38 un-initialed suras 19 x 2.

4. Between the first and last initialed sura there are 19 sets of alternating “initialed” and “uninitialed” suras.

Let me know if there are any concerns, else will include these in another 36 hours time God Willing.

(DukhanSmoke (talk) 14:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC))[reply]


God Willing more in this section I intend adding,

TABLE 1: Mathematical Coding of the Number of Verses with Initials

Sura No. No. of Initials Initialed Verses
2 3 1
3 3 1
7 4 1
10 3 1
11 3 1
12 3 1
13 4 1
14 3 1
15 3 1
19 5 1
20 2 1
26 3 1
27 2 1
28 3 1
29 3 1
30 3 1
31 3 1
32 3 1
36 2 1
38 1 1
40 2 1
41 2 1
42 5 2
43 2 1
44 2 1
45 2 1
46 2 1
50 1 1
68 2 1
822 79 30
822 + 79 + 30 = 931 = (19x49)

TABLE 2: Multiplying the First Two Columns of Table 1, Instead of Adding

Sura No. No. of Initials No of Initialed Verses
2 x 3 1
3 x 3 1
7 x 4 1
.. .. ..
42 x 5 2
.. .. ..
50 x 1 1
68 x 2 1
2022 30
2022 + 30 = 2052= (19x108)

TABLE 3: Mathematical Properties of the Initialed Suras

Sura Number Number of Verses Number Of Initialed Verses Gematrical Value of the Initials TOTAL
2 286 1 71 360
3 200 1 71 275
7 206 1 161 375
10 109 1 231 351
11 123 1 231 366
12 111 1 231 355
13 43 1 271 328
14 52 1 231 298
15 99 1 231 346
19 98 1 195 313
20 135 1 14 170
26 227 1 109 363
27 93 1 69 190
28 88 1 109 226
29 69 1 71 170
30 60 1 71 162
31 34 1 71 137
32 30 1 71 134
36 83 1 70 190
38 88 1 90 217
40 85 1 48 174
41 54 1 48 144
42 53 2 278 375
43 89 1 48 181
44 59 1 48 152
45 37 1 48 131
46 35 1 48 130
50 45 1 100 196
68 52 1 50 + 50 221
822 + 2743 + 30 + 3435 = 7030 =(19x370)

There are few more tables that are equally profound, however at the moment if you all are OK I will include these God Willing in another 36 hours time on the main page.

Peace

(DukhanSmoke (talk) 18:35, 17 December 2011 (UTC))[reply]

> DukhanSmoke ... Yes, there are indeed some interesting and quite impressive examples, in particular -

Sura "Al-Qalam" (no. 68) [carrying the Qur'anic initial "Noon", which occurs exactly 133 (=19 x 7) times in that sura], and Sura "Al-Shoora" (no. 42) [carrying the Qur'anic initial "Qaf", which occurs exactly 57 (=19 x 3) times in that sura]. --DLMcN (talk) 17:44, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Last section

[edit]

Who put the section linking alif-lam-mim to aum? It cites no sources and sounds rather like pure opinion. I'm removing the section unless anyone can give a good reason why it should stay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.48.57.148 (talk) 01:11, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is the most famous Muqatta'at!--79.69.96.179 (talk) 17:37, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense

[edit]

From the article:

"This apparent lack of inquisitiveness is cited as proof that such abbreviations were well known to the Arabs of the time and were in vogue long before the advent of Islam."

We have no other texts from the time that uses or mentions these abbreviations, so that cannot be true.

There are only two likely explanations:

1) The letters were taken to be mystic names / codes or something similar and the followers were afraid to question them, perhaps fearing such questions to betray lack of faith on their part. Or perhaps they simply didn't care, much the same as most people react to e.g. buzzwords nowadays.

2) The letters weren't in the Koran when it was originally authored and only inserted later when it was transcribed. Note that we don't have an original Koran. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.139.81.0 (talk) 01:30, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Muqattaʿat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:34, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Muqattaʿat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:33, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Taha name of Prophet Muhammad

[edit]

It is mentioned that these can be references to names of God, but in one case, Taha is a recognized name of Prophet Muhammad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1C0:6A00:6C80:C9CA:8690:39DA:FEF (talk) 03:14, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Translation

[edit]

Would these be better translated as "disjointed" or "disjoined"? Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:20c0:f600:ed23:89b:cef9:7c07 (talk • contribs)

It isn't a matter of translation, rather one of description. The intention is to say that the letters are written separated from the text that follows. For this meaning, "disjoined" is correct and "disjointed" is incorrect. I'm not entirely happy about this because "disjoined" is a rare word that many readers will not know. Zerotalk 03:58, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chants

[edit]

Hocuspocus abracadabra? Grow up, is any conjecture thought up by some crypto polemicist added now? Go back to the catholic encyclopedia. 128.206.16.115 (talk) 04:58, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Muqattaʿat&oldid=1244671962"