Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Order Of The Qur'an

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

(bismillah)

(salam)

 

Every Shi'a I have ever spoken with has told me that `Uthman's Qur'an (which is the one we use today) is in the wrong order.  All of the verses are correct but that the order is wrong.  `Ali (as) had compiled the Qur'an in the correct order and the correctly ordered Qur'an is now with Imam al-Asr.  

 

Well, today a Shi'a told me that this is not true and that `Uthman did it right (maybe the only right thing he ever did? lol)

 

So what's correct?

Only very knowledgeable e-Shaikhs need to reply.  :P  Okay, just kidding.  But if you have some sort of evidence, that would be great.

 

JazakAllah khayrrr

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

There was a question posted on the order of the Quran, his eminence Ayatollah Al-Hakeem replied in the following manner:  

 

How do I know that the order of revelations (Surahs) in the Quran are in correct order, or legitimate? Where is the proof they are in order beginning with Al-Alaq and so forth?

 

Answer: We are not certain of the sequence of the verses’ revelations. We are sure of the fact that the Quran is the current contemporary one.

 

 

 

Only after the zuhoor of Qaim (as), we would able to confirm this issue, Allah knows best

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

 

Every Shi'a I have ever spoken with has told me that `Uthman's Qur'an (which is the one we use today) is in the wrong order.  All of the verses are correct but that the order is wrong.  `Ali (as) had compiled the Qur'an in the correct order and the correctly ordered Qur'an is now with Imam al-Asr.  

 

Well, today a Shi'a told me that this is not true and that `Uthman did it right (maybe the only right thing he ever did? lol)

 

So what's correct?

Only very knowledgeable e-Shaikhs need to reply.   :P  Okay, just kidding.  But if you have some sort of evidence, that would be great.

 

JazakAllah khayrrr

(bismillah)  (wasalam)

 

To believe that the verses within each surah are in the wrong order, is equivalent to believeing that the Quran has undergone major distortions. I don't know how anyone can hold that belief and then claim not to believe in tahrif.

 

There is an opinion (and it seems like the best opinion) that the Quran was compiled during the time of the Prophet and what Uthman compiled and published was nothing other than what many Muslims at that time had memorised and written down. Thus Uthman's publication was a copy of what was generally accepted to be the Quran. If this view is accepted then it makes it somewhat difficult to say that even the surahs were in the wrong order. If the people used to revise the whole Quran in front of the Prophet and he knew the order of recitation, then how would they not know the proper order of the surahs, unless he didn't tell them?

 

Have a look at the book 'Discovering the Qur'an' by Neal Robinson to see some theories on why the surahs are in that particular order. It would seem that the ordering is too well designed to be put together haphazardly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To believe that the Qur'an is in it's proper order would require you to believe that 33:33 refers to the wives of the Prophet (sawa) instead of his progeny.  It is his wives that are purified from all sins; not his progeny.  At that rate, one might as well become a Sunni.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

To believe that the Qur'an is in it's proper order would require you to believe that 33:33 refers to the wives of the Prophet Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå instead of his progeny.  It is his wives that are purified from all sins; not his progeny.  At that rate, one might as well become a Sunni.

What on earth are you talking about?

The verse begins by discussing the wives and then changes in its grammatical structure to refer to just the Ahl al-Bayt. Furthermore, we have Ahadith from the Aimmah themselves stating this verse refers to them and does not mention that the wives are included in the Ahl al-Bayt.

People like to say

The version of the Hadith of the Cloak that is narrated in the Sahih Sitta, is narrated by Aisha herself. Now, if she was included in the Ahl al-Bayt, why on earth wasn't she under the cloak as well?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

It is so illogical to believe that the Quran is not perfect. I mean a perfect religion, with a perfect God, perfect Prophet and not a perfect book? Allah himself says in the Quran that he is the one who will save the Quran from distortion. If the verses were not put together in order of revelation, than maybe Allah wanted it to be that way.

 

Also, if the modern Quran, which is unchanged for 1400 years is not perfect, then why didn't the Imams (a.s.) bother to teach their students and companions to memories or compile the Quran in the order that it is meant to be?

 

What about the hadith of thaqalein? the book and the ahlulbait. It indicates that the book and ahlulbayt are availabile for us till Qiyama. and that book is this unchanged Quran which is perfect. 

 

Allah himself says in the Quran he will protect it from any distortion. No hadith is strong enough compared to a verse of the Quran. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

salam u alaykom Mu3lam,

sorry, I think im just a but lost here, appologise for my misunderstanding!

you initially asked the order of chapters then you went on about 33:33 !!!!!

have I miised out if something???!! please correct me if im wrong and accept my appologise

assalam u alaykom

To believe that the Qur'an is in it's proper order would require you to believe that 33:33 refers to the wives of the Prophet Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå instead of his progeny. It is his wives that are purified from all sins; not his progeny. At that rate, one might as well become a Sunni.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Also, if the modern Quran, which is unchanged for 1400 years is not perfect, then why didn't the Imams (a.s.) bother to teach their students and companions to memories or compile the Quran in the order that it is meant to be?

 

 

Have you read Al-Kafi?

 

you initially asked the order of chapters then you went on about 33:33 !!!!!

 

 

Not need to be alarmed, there was a shia scholar who believed that the verse of purification has been "misplaced" in the Quran after the verse regarding the wives. 

 

Author of “al-Murajiat” Abdhulhussain al-Musawi said:

“Although we are convinced that no distortion has taken place in the verses of the Noble Qur’an and that our heavenly Book has not been tampered with in any way, it is by no means clear that the arrangement and recension of the verses is precisely that in which they were revealed. For it is quite possible that the ‘purification verse’ concerning the People of the House was revealed separately and then, when the verses of the Qur’an were being assembled, was placed in the middle of the verses relating to the wives of the Prophet, 
either in error or deliberately
.”

 

Anyhow, the forum rules disallows any member to discuss on this issue. Lets drop it here. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

But again, Allah himself says in the Quran that he will protect it from any distortion.

 

This is the verse: 

 

إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ 

Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely be its guardian. [15:9]

 

I think the verse is open to several interpretations, don't you think? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

To say the Quran isnt perfect, is to say our imams didnt do their job. Now the order of revelations, i.e by subject/time-frame , is probably not correct (like the verse with "read" is in the end) but that doesnt challenge the perfection of the Quran. If we are to say the verses are misplaced, we are once again subjecting our Imams to be at fault here, which ends up challenging Allah's claims made in the Quran itself. Imam Ali A.S made damn sure the Quran was perfect before he died, as goes for the rest of our Imams A.S. 

 

My two cents, Allah knows Best.

 

Wa Salaam

Link to post
Share on other sites

^... Once again, order of recitation is different from order of revelation.

 

I think you mean to say the Qur'an is not in chronological order. If it was, we'd see the first first of Suratul `Alaq: اقرأ باسم ربك الذي خلق (Read in the name of your Lord Who created). I think it's the first 5 verses of Surah 96 that was revealed one after another when the Prophet  (pbuh) was told to begin his mission.

 

If the Qur'an was in chronological order, we'd see Surah al-Fatihah (as you've pointed out) as the first verse. I think what we have today is the `Uthmanic codex because the third caliph was the one who ordered the compiling of the Qur'an.  Yes, I've been watching some Sh. Ammar's lectures over Ramadhan  :P.

 

This one was so interesting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9d5J_0_Ss8

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

This is the verse: 

 

إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ 

Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely be its guardian. [15:9]

 

I think the verse is open to several interpretations, don't you think? 

 

 

 

This the verse often quoted by contemporary scholars. This is a free standing verse, there is no further explanation provided on how the Quran can be protected. 

 

 

The contemporary compilation of the Quran that we have now was compiled by fallible individuals, the most popular belief we have now is the fact the current Quran we have dates back to the recession of Caliph Uthman Bin Affan not that of Imam Ali (as). If the current Quran was compiled by Ameer ul Mumineen (as), can this be proven?

 

In another word, Caliph Uthman bin Affan was divinely inspired and guided by Allah so that Quran is safeguarded.

 

I know this will be hard for shias to accept but this is the only solution.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

This is too illogical. If there "were different" Qurans, than why is it that we don't see them? For the past 1400 years we've only and only seen one type of the quran. Why the shias who we believe are the guided ones, didn't memorise the as you believe "correct" Quran?I mean the Quran was not just passed down through texts, millions of people around the world at any time through history have memorized it.

 

Bring your proof if u are truthful. Show me one Hafiz around the world who has memorised a Quran that is different. Or show me a different text of the Quran.

 

It is not there. For me, if the Quran was not perfect, then Islam won't be perfect. That's a fact. 

Edited by HabibKarimi
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
This is too illogical. If there "were different" Qurans, than why is it that we don't see them? For the past 1400 years we've only and only seen one type of the quran

 

 

Read history, we have gone though destructive wars, shi'as were hunted down like rats by the Ammi rulers. Many many knowledgeable shias were murdered and Ahlul Bayt were oppressed. 

 

This discussion is what i term as "high level". I will stop here, if you want to go along logical lines i can do that, if you want me to go through hard facts i can do that also but this is not the forum. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

 

This discussion is what i term as "high level". I will stop here, if you want to go along logical lines i can do that, if you want me to go through hard facts i can do that also but this is not the forum. 

 

Well then post your proofs here, I am interested to know. I simply want to expand my knowledge, as that is why I am here at "shiachat". So please post your proofs here so we can benefit from it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
  • Advanced Member

(bismillah)

(salam)

 

To believe that the Qur'an is in it's proper order would require you to believe that 33:33 refers to the wives of the Prophet Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå instead of his progeny.  It is his wives that are purified from all sins; not his progeny.  At that rate, one might as well become a Sunni.

How is that brother Mu3lam?

watch this

 

Quick summary of what Kamal Al Haidery says in this video is that the ayahs before verse 33:33 (talking about the wives) are generally criticisms/admonishments. So when you see these criticisms/warnings/admonitions one after another, then you see the pure praise for Ahl al-Bayt(as), you realize that these special people are not like the wives.
Just like you don't know how good Islam is until you see how messed up the other religions are, you don't see how good the praise is in the second part of 33:33 until you see the verses prior to it.
Additionally, he points out notice how in the first half of 33:33, it says buyoot (plural for "house") whereas in the second half "Ahl al-Bayt" the word "bayt" (singular for "house") is used, again distinguishing them.

This is a very loose summary of the Sayyid's general points and Allah(swt) knows best. He's basically saying that those who say that the ayah was placed in the wrong place are incorrect because that was the BEST place to put the ayah.

And Allah(swt) knows best.

 

As far as difference of recitations of Quran is concerned i would like you to read this article of Ayatullah Sayyid Abulqasim al-Khui here http://www.al-islam.org/the-collection-and-preservation-of-the-quran-extract-ayatullah-adul-qasim-al-khui

 

Jazak Allah Khair

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Al-Haidary has said many things, he even said Al-Kulayni compiled a book of fatawa ie Al-Kafi. 

 

Just because you find buyoot and followed by Bayt, it does not justify the fact that both of the parts of the verse were NOT revealed together. Infact if you understand Arabic, the purification part seems misplaced. It was certainly placed with some other agenda. 

 

If you doubt me, look at Surah 5:3 

 

Prohibited to you are dead animals, blood, the flesh of swine, and that which has been dedicated to other than Allah , and [those animals] killed by strangling or by a violent blow or by a head-long fall or by the goring of horns, and those from which a wild animal has eaten, except what you [are able to] slaughter [before its death], and those which are sacrificed on stone altars, and [prohibited is] that you seek decision through divining arrows. That is grave disobedience. This day those who disbelieve have despaired of [defeating] your religion; so fear them not, but fear Me. This day I have perfected for you your religion and completed My favor upon you and have approved for you Islam as religion. But whoever is forced by severe hunger with no inclination to sin - then indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.

 

I have not dissected the verse and removed this part shown below, now read it without it 

 

This day those who disbelieve have despaired of [defeating] your religion; so fear them not, but fear Me. This day I have perfected for you your religion and completed My favor upon you and have approved for you Islam as religion.

 

Prohibited to you are dead animals, blood, the flesh of swine, and that which has been dedicated to other than Allah , and [those animals] killed by strangling or by a violent blow or by a head-long fall or by the goring of horns, and those from which a wild animal has eaten, except what you [are able to] slaughter [before its death], and those which are sacrificed on stone altars, and [prohibited is] that you seek decision through divining arrows. That is grave disobedience.  But whoever is forced by severe hunger with no inclination to sin - then indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.

 

 

 

This will be sufficient for those with intellect!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

This will be sufficient for those with intellect!

 

Refute his argument: http://www.shiasource.com/al-mizan/tafsir/5-1-3/

 

Allamah Tabatabai beautifully explains the purpose behind the joining of these verses. God's religion isnt a puzzle book where either Allah allows people to misplace His verses, or that He himself does so.. Nay, His system is far above our intellect and we can just taste its beauty. Each and every verse is significant to its placement.

Edited by PureEthics
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Each and every verse is significant to its placement.

 

 

Allama Tabatabai himself admitted that about the defects in the arrangement of the Quran. 

 

This view is strengthened by the fact that most, if not all the traditions describing the reason of its revelation - and there are a lot of such traditions - particularly talk about the words of Allah, "This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion…", without hinting even once to the beginning of the verse, that is: Forbidden to you is that which dies of itself…This proves that the Divine words, "This day have those who disbelieve…", were independently revealed and have no connection with the preceding or the following verses. Thus, the present positioning of this speech in the middle of the verse will have to be attributed either to the Prophet (s.a.w.) or to the compilers of the Qur'an after him.

 

 

 

He did not delve much into the question I have raised. There are other Shii Mufasireen who actually raised important points: 

 

The fact is that the verse on completion has nothing to do with the prohibition on food, so how can it be placed in the centre? 

 

The other Shia mufasireen said that a Furo' cannot complete the religion. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Allama Tabatabai himself admitted that about the defects in the arrangement of the Quran. 

 

 

 

He did not delve much into the question I have raised. There are other Shii Mufasireen who actually raised important points: 

 

The fact is that the verse on completion has nothing to do with the prohibition on food, so how can it be placed in the centre? 

 

The other Shia mufasireen said that a Furo' cannot complete the religion. 

 

 

Where did he admit that? The quote you have provided is merely talking about the verse prior to the profection one and there is nothing wrong with what he is saying. This does not imply that he thought or he is saying that the order is irrelevant, I dont understand how your concluding that. Also you misquoted his excerpt. That isnt his view, if you read the excerpt carefully, he is countering an argument that one, like yourself, might say:

 

 

We may say that this speech was actually revealed in the middle of this verse separating the preceding part from the following one; or that the Prophet (s.a.w.) himself ordered the scribes to put this speech in this place even though it had no connotation with this verse, and was not even revealed at the same time; or that the compilers put it in this place at the time of compilation although both the parts were revealed at totally different times. None of these probabilities can affect the view we have just mentioned that it is a parenthetical speech.

 

The quote you have provided is talking about this verse: "This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion, so fear them not, and fear Me." 5:3 and I agree with him when he states

 

 

QUR'AN: This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion, so fear them not, and fear Me. The positioning of this speech in the midst of this verse, and then its connotation are truly amazing. ..."is a parenthetical speech placed in the midst of this verse, yet the main verse does not depend on it for its exposition or explanation."

 

 

The two sentences, that is: This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion…, and: This day have I perfected for you your religion…, have identical themes and no one can have any doubt that the meaning of both are connected with each other. There is very close connection between the despairing of the disbelievers from the Muslims' religion and the perfection of the Muslims' religion; both connotations are joined together in a single theme, both sentences are interconnected and their sides are combined with one another. Add to it the singularity of context in these two sentences.

 

 

It appears from the above that this parenthetical verse: "This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion…", and: chosen for you Islam as a religion, is a single speech and its parts are inter-connected and the whole speech leads to a single theme  which is reflected in the two sentences jointly. It makes no difference whether we say that this speech is connected with the preceding and following sentences or not. The two sentences will remain as one speech; they can never be treated as two talks having two separate aims. Also, it is clear that the word "this day" repeated in both sentences refers to a single day when the believers were despaired and the religion was perfected.

 

There is lots more supporting this view, but please read it carefully and comprehend each sentence brother. Basically, he is stating that although there may be no connection, like revelation time, with the verses surrounding it, it is beautifully placed there because of the significance of the verses around it, especially the verse about perfecting the religion. Also the flow of the verses stay in syn. If you understand, it can be said that these verses imply the notion of those who outrightly rejected the day of ghadir.

 

http://www.shiasource.com/al-mizan/tafsir/5-1-3/

Edited by PureEthics
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...