3

I have heard from someone that on the day of judgement Quran will tell which person fulfilled its rights. So, I want to ask What are the rights of Quran on us ?

  • 1
    What do you mean with; "What are the rights of Quran on us"? – Kilise Aug 20 '17 at 20:14
  • Maybe we shouldd first check whether there is a tradition which supports this claim, once we have setteled that maybe we may have some more information and would also be able to check the authenticity of this claim – Medi1Saif Aug 20 '17 at 20:48
  • 1
    It seems to me that these are two different questions. On one side you have the Quran as a witness or judge on judgment day on the other side what one may call the rights of the Quran on us, I'm not sure if we can answer the second part fully, but one could at least point at some of these rights! Therefore I'd strongly recommend you to split your post! – Medi1Saif Aug 21 '17 at 10:52
1

The only thing that comes to mind is Quran 25:30

"And said the Messenger, "O my Lord! Indeed, my people took this the Quran (as) a forsaken thing."

The word used is MAHJUR, which means to immobilize something. The villagers who bind a cow by tying her front foot to her horn they effectvely MAHJUR it.

-4

For a Coranist interpretation of the question, we read in 2:256 (Pickthal) that

There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. And he who rejecteth false deities and believeth in Allah hath grasped a firm handhold which will never break. Allah is Hearer, Knower.

Since this Coran is a (not necessarily strict) subset of this religion, it follows that there can be no compulsion with respect to the Coran, and hence it has no a priori rights on us. Furthermore, we read in 88:21-22 (Pickthal) that

Remind them, for thou art but a remembrancer,

Thou art not at all a warder over them.

We note that the entire chapter does not specify who is being referred to in the second person. The standard interpretations, assuming a difference between the Messenger and the Message being sent, conclude that it is the Messenger that is referred to in the second person. However, by relaxing the above assumption, we find that by regarding the Coran itself as a rasool, the verse has as a direct corollary that it has no rights over them ("thou art not at all a warder over them").

  • When there is punishment, both worldly and in the hereafter, for not believing in and acting on the Quran, then doesn't it imply that those things are rights of the Quran? – UmH Oct 19 '18 at 5:22
  • I assume that you're referring to 88:23-24; we note that there needs to be an active "turning away" in addition to the disbelief you mention (which itself has been interpreted as active or passive, depending on one's interpretation of the word kufr) in order for punishment (3adhaab, which according to Ibn Arabi refers to a process more like tasting rather than punishment) to be exacted on them. Under the above interpretation, inaction does not imply punishment, but incorrect action does. – Carl Masens Oct 19 '18 at 5:29
  • Even if I were to accept that (I might not because of e.g. 48:13 , 7:87 etc.), wouldn't it still imply that the Quran has the right to not be actively 'turned away from'. – UmH Oct 19 '18 at 5:35
  • That would be a right to inaction, which is arguably inconsistent. One needs to precisely define what a "right" is in order to proceed further. – Carl Masens Oct 19 '18 at 5:37
  • 1
    Your answer also contradicts other verses like 2:121 which explicitly mentions a حق (right) of the Quran ; and 5:45 which declares those who do not judge according to the Quran to be ظالم (oppressor), which directly implies that they have oppressed a right. – UmH Oct 19 '18 at 7:03

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.