The missing Basmalah, another GREAT MIRACLE.
Akram53103
In the Name of God ,Most Gracious, Most Merciful
I was surprised to find that Muslims do not know that there is a
"Basmalah" missing form Sura 9 in the Quran. We all know that every sura
in the Quran opens with the statement "In the name of God , Most Gracious,
Most Merciful," known as the Basmalah. The only exception to this rule is
Sura 9.
This has been an intriguing feature of the Quran for 14 centuries. Many
theories have been advanced to explain this phenomenon. We also know
everything God made in this world is made for a reason, and there should
be a reason behind the missing Basmalah.
Now we learn that the missing Basmalah plays a significant role as
(1) a significant constituent of the Quran's mathematical miracle.
(2) a glaring sign from the Most Gracious, Most Merciful, that Sura 9 has
been tampered with , by the addition of verses 128 and 129. A historical
fact that could not be proven until the mathematical miracle proved it
beyond any doubt.
Both roles of the missing Basmalah were revealed with the discovery of the
Quran's mathematical code. The following list of factual observations
illustrate the miraculous features of the missing Basmalah.
(1)Since the Basmalah consists of 19 Arabic letters, and prefixes all the
suras except one, it can be considered the foundation upon which the
Quran's 19-based code is built. But the absence of the Basmalah from Sura
9 causes the number of this crucial opening statement to be 113, a number
that does not conform with the Quran's code. However we find that this
deficiency is compensated for in Sura 27. Two Basmalahs occur in Sura 27,
one as an opener and one in Verse 30. This restores the total number of
Basmalahs in the Quran to 114, 19X6.
(2) From the missing Basmalah of Sura 9 to the extra Basmalah of Sura 27,
there are 19 suras.
(3) The sum of sura numbers from the missing Basmalah (Sura 9) to the
extra Basmalah (Sura 27) is 342, 19X18 (that is sura number
9+10+11+12+13...... ....+25+26+27 =342
This is a mathematical property, any consecutive 19 numbers will add up to
a multiple of 19. But the miraculous phenomenon is that this number, 342,
equals the number of words from the first Basmalah of Sura 27 to the
second Basmalah in 27:30.
(4) The occurrence of the extra Basmalah in 27:30 conforms with the
Quran's code in that the sura number , plus the verse number is a multiple
of 19 (27+30=57 =19X3).
(5) The occurrence of the extra Basmalah in verse 30 compares with the
occurrence of the number 19 itself in Verse 30, (Sura 74).
(6) The Quran contains 6234 numbered verses. The absence of the Basmalah
from Sura 9, and compensating for it in Verse 30 of Sura 27 gives us two
numbered Basmalahs, 1:1 and 27:30, and 112 un-numbered Basmalah. This
causes the total number of verses in the Quran to be 6234+112=6346, 19X334
(Notice that 6+3+4+6=?)
(7)From the missing Basmalah to the extra Basmalah, the number of verses
containing the word "Allah" is 513, 19X27. Note that 27 is the sura number
where the extra Basmalah occurs.
(8)The sum of verse numbers (1+2+3+....+n), plus the number of verses from
the missing Basmalah to the extra one is 119624, 19X6296.
Four more sophisticated facts are described regarding this miracle, that
may seem too advanced for some. These facts proves the presence of the
Quran's code in all the aspects of this Book, the Quran, that God called
complete, perfect and fully detailed and challenged the world to come up
with even one sura like it, literally and mathematically. It also proves
that Sura 9 consists of 127 verses, not 129, and that the historical
suspicion of Verses 128, and 129 is true.
MORE SIGNS IN THE HORIZON FOR THE TRUE BELIEVERS.
Mohammad A Ali
Assalam u alaikum
I was trying to count and verify these mathematical properties you are
speaking of. I wasn't sure whether to consider the letters with shadda
as two letters or one. Also, what about alifs that are pronounced but
not written out in some mushafs. For example, Ar-Rahman is written
alif-ra-'ha-meem-noon but is pronounced the same way one would pronounce
alif-ra-'ha-meem-alif-noon, which is also considered a valid spelling.
In most mushafs, even when they don't write the alif in the word, they
put a small "dagger" alif above the ra. Should we consider the dagger
alif in our count or not.
Also, what about counting connecting words and prepositions. Wa is
always written as a separate word, but fa is always prefixed to the
following word. Do we consider each to be a separate word. Also, what
about prefixed prepositions, do we considered la and ba as separate
words. What about contractions like innee and innanee, which are
contraction of inna ana, just like innahum is a combination of inna hum.
The list of what to consider as separate words and letters goes on and
on. What is the source for figuring out what standard to adopt? Since
the Quran was revealed and transmitted mostly orally, with writing style
and conventions changing over time, how do we verify which is the proper
convention for counting?????
The reason I am concerned about this is that without proper conventions,
the data would be open to manipulation. Perhaps the info has already
been posted, and I missed it while I was busy with my finals. If so I
would appreciate if it was reposted.
Azam
shawki Hamdan
Mohammad A Ali wrote:
>
> Assalam u alaikum
>
> I was trying to count and verify these mathematical properties you are
> speaking of. I wasn't sure whether to consider the letters with shadda
> as two letters or one.
Count the letters as you see them written. A "ra" with shadda still
counts as one letter.
> Also, what about alifs that are pronounced but not written out in some
> mushafs. For example, Ar-Rahman is written alif-ra-'ha-meem-noon but
> is pronounced the same way one would pronounce
> alif-ra-'ha-meem-alif-noon, which is also considered a valid spelling.
Perhaps you can tell me the verse number and version of the Qur'an
you are looking at. The rule is still that you count only VISIBLE
letters. If you look at the basmala here are the visible letters:
ba - seen - meem - alif - lam - lam - ha - alif - lam - ra - ha - meem -
nun -alif - lam - ra - ha - ya - meem. That is 19 letters.
> In most mushafs, even when they don't write the alif in the word, they
> put a small "dagger" alif above the ra. Should we consider the dagger
> alif in our count or not.
No. Onlt the basic visible letters that make up the word.
> Also, what about counting connecting words and prepositions. Wa is
> always written as a separate word, but fa is always prefixed to the
> following word. Do we consider each to be a separate word.
The "fa" is part of the next word. The "wow" I'll check it for you if it
is to be cosidered a letter or word.
> Also, what about prefixed prepositions, do we considered la and ba as
> separate words.
No. They are part of the words they are attached to.
> What about contractions like innee and innanee, which are
> contraction of inna ana, just like innahum is a combination of inna
> hum.
As I said before, you only count the letter you see on the page in front
of you.
> The list of what to consider as separate words and letters goes on and
> on. What is the source for figuring out what standard to adopt?
The standard again is thet you count only what you see.
> Since the Quran was revealed and transmitted mostly orally, with
> writing style and conventions changing over time, how do we verify
> which is the proper convention for counting?????
Everything in the Qur'an was dictated by Allah from the spelling of words
to the verse numbers, to the order of suras. Please see my analysis of
the word "Bastatan".
Also look at verse 19:2 and the way the word "rahmat" is spelled. As you
know that word should be spelled with "ta marbootah". But I have checked
every Arabic Qur'an I can lay my hands on. It is always spelled with an
open "ta" in this verse.
> The reason I am concerned about this is that without proper
> conventions, the data would be open to manipulation. Perhaps the info
> has already been posted, and I missed it while I was busy with my
> finals. If so I would appreciate if it was reposted.
Your concern is valid. I believe I've answered all your questions except
for the "wow" and whether it should be considered as a word in some
cases.
Peace,
--
Shawki Hamdan <sha...@ix.netcom.com>
God alone, Qur'an alone, no idolatry.
The Flying Blade
Assalamualaikum.
Was: The missing Basmalah, another GREAT MIRACLE.
Then there it is, another Khalifite trying to reach to that
mathematical height that wasn't, simultaneously declaring
the miracle that wasn't.
akram...@aol.com (Akram53103) wrote:
->In the Name of God ,Most Gracious, Most Merciful
->
->I was surprised to find that Muslims do not know that
->there is a "Basmalah" missing form Sura 9 in the Quran. We
->all know that every sura in the Quran opens with the
->statement "In the name of God , Most Gracious,
->Most Merciful," known as the Basmalah. The only exception
->to this rule is Sura 9.
->
->This has been an intriguing feature of the Quran for 14
->centuries.
I don't know about it to be intriguing, but Abdullah ibn
Abbas(RA) asked Uthman(RA) pertaining to almost the same
question. Let's take a look at their discourse taken from
Let's explain some terminologies here:
-Surah Tiwal refers to the seven lengthy ones, like
al-Baqarah.
-Surah Mi"in refers to the surah of about 100 verses in
length.
-Surah Mathani refers to those surahs shorter than Mi"in.
-Surah Mufassal refers to those surah found on shorter
chapters.
>From Sunan Abu Dawud:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
(Book 2, Chapter 276, tradition 785)
"Yazid al farisi said: I heard ibn Abbas say: I asked
Uthman(RA): What moved you to put the Surah al-Baraah which
belongs to the mi"in surah and the surah al-Anfaal which
belongs to the mathani's in the category of al-sab'u al-
tiwal(the seven long surahs), and YOU DID NOT WRITE "IN
THE NAME OF ALLAH, THE COMPASSIONATE, THE MERCIFUL, i.e.
BASMALLAH, BETWEEN THEM?
Uthman(RA) replied: When the verses of the Qur'an were
revealed to the Prophet(PBUH), he called someone to write
them for him and said to him: PUT THIS VERSE IN THE SURAH IN
WHICH SUCH AND SUCH HAS BEEN MENTIONED; and when one or two
verses were revealed, he used to say the same thing. SURAH
AL-ANFAL IS THE FIRST SURAH THAT WAS REVEALED IN MEDINA,
and SURAH AL-BARAAH WAS REVEALED LAST IN THE QUR'AN, AND
IT'S CONTENT WERE SIMILAR TO THOSE OF AL ANFAL. I, therefore
>>THOUGHT THAT IT WAS PART OF AL-ANFAL<<. Hence, I put them
in the category of al-sab'u al-tiwal, and I DIDN'T WRITE
"IN THE NAME OF ALLAH, THE MERCIFUL, THE COMPASSIONATE"
BETWEEN THEM. "
Tradition 786:
Also reported through ibn Abbas through different chain of
transmissions with the following addition: The Apostle of
Allah(PBUH) passed away, but he did not mention to us that
Surah al-Baraah is part of al-Anfal.
Abu Dawud comment: Al-Shabi, Abu Malik, Qatadah, and Thabit
ibn Umarah said: The Prophet(PBUH) did not write "In the
name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate, the
Merciful" until surat al-Naml was revealed. This is what
they meant. This is a mursal tradition, an ommision of the
Companion's name from the chain of transmission.
Tradition 787:
"ibn Abbas said: the Prophet(PBUH) did not distinguish
between the two surahs until the words "in the name of
Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate" was revealed to
him. These are the words of ibn al-Sarh."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Clearly the omission of the Basmallah is due to the ijtihad
made by Uthman in the absence of the Prophetic order, a very
careful and thoughtful one indeed. And that other Basmallah
is still "suspended" at surah al-Naml(27:30), unshifted,
since the Prophet(PBUH) did not order anybody to put it
anywhere else.
BTW, verse numbering is the result of Ijma', if anybody has
any questions about it, so are the surah numbering, the
pronunciation, the authenticity, the various scripts, the
collections, and so on.
There is nothing pertaining to 19-ness about them. Will the
Koran be undecipherible if we switch the Surah numbering?
No! Will the Koran cease to become the revelation if we
switch the pronunciation? No! Will the Koran lose its
integrity if it's ordered STRICTLY by the length of the
Surah? No! The point?.....
All these facts about the Koran are nothing more than
general agreements between Companions, and indeed through
their hands, and not through numerology, God has preserved
the Koran, like God has promised. Alhamdulillah!
Wassalam.
The Flying Blade
msy...@primenet.com
AYMusa
Salaamun alaikum. Apparently the Flying Blade thinks that the
companions of Muhammad could somehow outsmart Allah (SWT) and
decide on the order of the suras and verses and where to
put the basmallah or to leave it out. Also, in claiming that
the numbering of suras and verses was ijtihad of the companions,
Blade openly disagrees with orthodox Muslim history. Al-Suyuti
states categorically, in his discussion of the collection of the
Qur'an (al-Itqan v.1) that the ordering of the suras and verses
was established by Allah (tawqeef). Al-Suyuti goes so far as to
say that Muslims do not disagree on this point. But then, al-suyuti
never met the Blade.
--
AYMusa
AYMusa
Salaamun alaikum. The Blade insists that Allah did NOT determine
the verse and sura numbers. This he says was the consensus of the
companions. But this is a new idea. It is not in keeping with
orthodox Muslim history, which states that Allah (swt) determined
the order of the suras and the verse, and that the suras were revealed
with numbers. But now that we have discovered numerical proof of the
divine ordering of the Qur'an to which Blade objects, Blade is forced
to deny anything in history that might support the idea that Allah (swt)
controlled every aspect of the revelation, collection, and arrangement
of the Qur'an. Instead, he prefers to view Allah (swt) as incompetent and
in need of the consensus of the companions of Muhammad.
--
AYMusa
The Flying Blade
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Followup-To:
Reply-To:
Subject: Re: ->> The missing Basmallah, the 19'ers' miracle that
wasn't...... <<-
Another, you guessed it!, Koranite/Khalifite with reading
comprehension problem, but that's O.K. We knew that already.
Actually, come to think of it, that seems to be the Khalifites
common thread, among many other things, that they have a serious
case of reading comprehension problem, thus easily put into a heavy
spell of the supreme "19-highness" Khalifa.
AYMusa <71620...@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
->Apparently the Flying Blade thinks that the
->companions of Muhammad could somehow outsmart Allah (SWT) and
->decide on the order of the suras and verses and where to
->put the basmallah or to leave it out.
My advice to this particular Khalifite, whatever her name is
on AOL account, is to reread the article.
->Also, in claiming that the numbering of suras and verses was ijtihad
->of the companions.....
First of all, before you answer any post, if there is any next time,
is to straighten your terminology. The Ijma' and the Ijtihad are two
different animals; one is a lion and the other one is a cheetah,
there....
->Blade openly disagrees with orthodox Muslim history. Al-Suyuti
->states categorically, in his discussion of the collection of the
->Qur'an (al-Itqan v.1) that the ordering of the suras and verses
->was established by Allah (tawqeef).
Again, reread the article, maybe you will understand better, but then
again, with the chronic "illness" in your reading ability, you may not
be able to grasp the meaning at all. That's O.K., we know that
already. Yet again, ones who called muslims as "orthodox" muslims or
other names should know already where their belief lies. You are
being a "modern" muslim should seek help, maybe a reading tutor is in
order, if you want to seek help for your "earthly" problem anyway.
Wassalam to the rest of muslims who believe the complete shahadah as
prescribed in adhan circa ~2H.
P.S. To other kind of "muslims", may God forgive you as I'm not even
remotely ready to say anything nice about you.
The Flying Blade
msy...@primenet.com