-
Coherence In The Quran – Difference Of Opinion Between Farahi And Islahi
Imam Farahi understood Quran has 9 groups but Imam Islahi decreased the number to 7. What were the reasons of this difference of opinion? If the 2 pioneers differ in their understanding then how can we say nazm-e-quran is the basis of all understanding?
-
15 Replies
-
Coherence In The Quran – Difference Of Opinion Between Farahi And Islahi
updated 3 years, 4 months ago
4 Members
·
15
Replies
-
Imam Farahi identified the coherence of Quran but didn’t specify the exact groupings the way it was later identified by Imam Islahi into seven groups with precision and he also identified the fact what ‘saba’masani’ in Quran actually means. Since it was a new discovery and it takes time to precisely identify the application of certain principles when identified and sometimes the conclusion can still be different between two scholars even after application of the same principles.
Please refer to the video below from 1:06 to 22:12
-
Please also refer to the video below from 38:05 to 42:51
-
Thank you brother Umer for taking the time to answer my question. I do not have any objections to the videos u posted.
I would disagree that Imam Farahi didn’t identify surah groups. His grouping is as follows
A: 1-5, B: 6-9, C: 10-22, D: 23-24, E: 25-33, F: 34-49, G: 50-66, H: 67-112, I: 113-114
Imam Islahi or Ghamidi sahab didn’t mention in their tafsirs that why they adopted 7 groups instead of 9?
Thanks
-
The basis of division has been discussed at length by Ghamidi Sahab and how seven groups are constituted , but not the reason as to why seven and not nine because the former already answers the latter.
-
-
I don’t think it is so simple. Discoverer of Nazm identified 9 groups. Within few yrs it was reduced to 7 and now it’s the official grouping.
Both Imam Islahi and Ghamidi sahab explained their differences with Imam Farahi and Islahi respectively about trivial issues. So it’s prudent that they should’ve identified their reasons to disagree with the grouping proposed by the discoverer of Nazm
Explaining 7 groups doesn’t suffice because both groupings said to have emerged from similar core principles. Both can not be correct otherwise Nizam ul quran is reduced to tafseer bi rai.
-
As I motioned earlier Islāḥī and Ghāmidī have further developed this model of Qur’ān tafsīr. It would therefore be useful to briefly explain their contributions. Islāḥī’s understanding of the ‘umūd of the sūrahs is identical to that of his teacher. He has however modified the overall structure of the Book as understood by his mentor. He holds that there are seven groups of the sūrahs instead of nine. He believes that all sūrahs, with few exceptions, have been put in pairs. He has established the seven-fold division of the Holy Qur’ān by pleading to the Qur’ān itself. He holds that in each group the Makkan and Madinan sūrahs constitute distinct blocks, the former preceding the latter. Farāhī, however, did not stress on this aspect of internal arrangement of groups. Islahī believes that each of the seven sūrah groups treats all the phases of the Islamic movement as led by Muhammad in Arabia, though emphasis in each groups is on different themes of the movement. Farāhī does not assign specific themes to each group of sūrahs. As to Ghāmidī’s contribution to the concept of nazam he makes valuable additions to the elaborateness of the overall structure ofthe Holy Qur’ān while keeping alive emphasis on the internal nazam of the sūrah. Asif Iftikhār has summarized Ghāmidī’s concept of Qur’ānic nazam in the following words. “The basic theme of the Qur’ān is a description of the Prophetic indhār (admonition) to his people, the Banū Ismā‘īl–more specifically the Quraysh. Prophet Muhammad, according to Ghāmidī, belonged to a specific category of the messengers of God who were sent to specific peoples as God’s final judgment on them. The Qur’ānic term for such messengers is rasūl (plural: rusul). Unlike some other messengers, termed as anbiyā’ (singular: nabī), whose basic purpose is to prophesize the coming of a rasūl and who are sometimes killed by their own people, the rusul always triumph. A rasūl’s people are always given Divinepunishment on denial after a stipulated time period and rewarded with a special privilege in this world if they accept his messageand the authority. In Prophet Muhammad’s case, his prophetic mission of doing indhār went through different phases, whichcan be categorized as general admonition (indhār-I ‘ām), culmination of the conclusive argument (itmām-i hujjat), the abandonment and migration (barā’at and hijrat), and the reward and punishment (jazā’ and sazā). A depiction of these themes is given in the Qur’ān in seven distinct groups, each group consisting of a set of Makkan and Madīnan sūrahs.(An excerpt from Exordium to Coherence in the Qur’ān An English Translation of Muqaddamah Niẓām al-Qur’ān Ḥamīd al-Dīn Farāhī
Translated by Tariq Mahmood Hashmi)
-
-
Jaza’k Allah brother
Imam Islahi explained his internal division of surahs in detail. This is the usual theme that a student expands on the work of teacher and further elaborate subtle nuances
However, did Imam Islahi or Ghamidi sahab explained why and how they disagreed with Imam Farahi’s basic grouping?
The excerpt only mentioned he differed but doesn’t explain the academic reasons?
-
I think that the excerpt shared by Ahsan sahab above explains the academic reasons for the difference. This is of course a matter that can only become clear after carefully comparing the groupings done by Farahi sahab and Islahi sahab instead of trying to understand the difference in theory.
-
-
No it doesn’t explain at all. It says Imam Islahi believed in surah pairs and he pleaded to the Quran. This is a major difference and not a minor one. Imam Islahi changed the fundamental grouping of surahs. My question was if Imam Islahi or Ghamidi sahab explained this fundamental change. Or any other scholar from AlMawrid. Off course one can analyze the 2 groupings and derive ones own conclusion. In this case, we have to believe that Nazm is not inherent to the Quran but based on opinions alone and 2 people can differ among their opinions.
-
There’s nothing wrong with someone else improving upon the idea and deriving even a better grouping. This is how knowledge progresses in every field of knowledge. Just because Einstein came up with a completely different idea about gravity than Newton, even though both of them had the same universe to observe, doesn’t establish that the concept of gravity is subjective.
-
Absolutely, I am not saying it’s wrong at all but wanted to know the reasons, that’s all
Newton and Einstein r not similar. Einstein didn’t use Newtonian mechanics to discover relationship between time and space. Imam Islahi used Imam Farahi’s rules of nazm however.
I don’t think we r going anywhere. Can I request u to plz forward my question to AlMawrid Q&A or another senior member. I am sure I am not the first one to ask this question
-
You can ask this question directly to Ghamidi sb by registring to ask ghamidi session live. The new event will be soon announced by Faisal sb on the first thread in the forum General Discussions
-
-
I would like to thank all of you for taking time to answer my question and when I disagreed you pointed me towards Ghamidi sahab rather than shunning me aside
My basic understanding was wrong, nazm isn’t fundamental to quranic structure but a way to understand it better. So scholars will keep studying and improving this concept.
Is there any research work on Imam Farahi’s grouping? (Urdu or English) I already read mustansir mir’s book on nazm.
-
You can read Exordium to Coherence in the Qur’ān by Imam farahi. Al bayan and Tadaburre Quran also discuss nazam
in the preface part.
-
Yes, I have Tadabbur ul quran and Albayan. Also urdu translation of Nizam ul quran but I haven’t read it yet
I will do that
Thank you
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
