From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - View original article
|Part of a series on the|
|Sura · Ayah|
|Adam · Noah · Abraham · Joseph (son of Jacob) · Moses|
King David · King Solomon · Mary
Jesus · Muhammad
|Tajwid · Hizb · Tarteel · Quranic guardian|
Manzil · Qari' · Juz' · Rasm · Ruku' · Sujud
|List of translations · English translations|
|Meccan suras · Medinan suras|
|Persons related to verses · Justice|
Asbab al-nuzul · Naskh · Biblical narratives
Tahrif · Bakkah · Muqatta'at
|Quran and Sunnah|
|Literalism · Miracles · Science|
|Shia · Criticism · Desecration|
Surah of Wilaya and Nurayn · Tanazzulat
Qisas Al-Anbiya · House of the Quran
|This article is part of a series on:|
The Quran (English pronunciation: //[n 1] kor-AHN; Arabic: القرآن al-qurʾān, IPA: [qurˈʔaːn],[n 2] literally meaning "the recitation"), also transliterated Qur'an, Koran, Al-Coran, Coran, Kuran, and Al-Qur'an, is the central religious text of Islam, which Muslims believe to be the verbatim word of God (Arabic: الله, Allah). It is regarded widely as the finest piece of literature in the Arabic language.
The Quran is composed of verses (Ayat) that make up 114 chapters (suras) of unequal length which are classified either as Meccan (المكية) or Medinan (المدينية) depending upon the place and time of their claimed revelation. Muslims believe the Quran to be verbally revealed through angel Jibrīl (Gabriel) from God to Muhammad gradually over a period of approximately 23 years beginning on 22 December 609 CE, when Muhammad was 40, and concluding in 632 CE, the year of his death.
Shortly after Muhammad's death the Quran was compiled into a single book by order of the first Caliph Abu Bakr and at the suggestion of his future successor Umar. Hafsa, Muhammad's widow and Caliph Umar's daughter, was entrusted with that Quranic text after the second Caliph Umar died. When the third Caliph Uthman began noticing slight differences in pronunciation of the Quranic Arabic by those whose dialect was not that of the Quraish, he sought Hafsa's permission to use her text and commissioned a committee to produce a standard copy of the text of Quran to which added diacritical marks ensured correct pronunciation, and to be set as the standard dialect, the Quraish dialect, now known as Fus'ha (Modern Standard Arabic) (see Origin and development of the Quran). Five of these original Qurans (Mus'haf) were sent to the major Muslim cities of the era, with Uthman keeping one for his own use in Medina. Any variations to standardized text were invalidated and ordered to be destroyed, all other versions of the Quran copied by scribes subsequently were from this codex. This process of formalization is known as the "Uthmanic recension". The present form of the Quran text is accepted by most scholars as the original version compiled by Abu Bakr.
Muslims regard the Quran as the main miracle of Muhammad, the proof of his prophethood and the culmination of a series of divine messages that started with the messages revealed to Adam, regarded in Islam as the first prophet, and continued with the Suhuf Ibrahim (Scrolls of Abraham), the Tawrat (Torah or Pentateuch) of Moses, the Zabur (Tehillim or Book of Psalms) of David, and the Injil (Gospel) of Jesus. The Quran assumes familiarity with major narratives recounted in Jewish and Christian scriptures, summarizing some, dwelling at length on others and in some cases presenting alternative accounts and interpretations of events. The Quran describes itself as a book of guidance, sometimes offering detailed accounts of specific historical events, and often emphasizing the moral significance of an event over its narrative sequence.
The word qurʾān appears about 70 times in the Quran itself, assuming various meanings. It is a verbal noun (maṣdar) of the Arabic verb qaraʾa (قرأ), meaning “he read” or “he recited.” The Syriac equivalent is qeryānā, which refers to “scripture reading” or “lesson”. While most Western scholars consider the word to be derived from the Syriac, the majority of Muslim authorities hold the origin of the word is qaraʾa itself. In any case, it had become an Arabic term by Muhammad's lifetime. An important meaning of the word is the “act of reciting”, as reflected in an early Quranic passage: “It is for Us to collect it and to recite it (qurʾānahu)”.
In other verses, the word refers to “an individual passage recited [by Muhammad]”. Its liturgical context is seen in a number of passages, for example: "So when al-qurʾān is recited, listen to it and keep silent". The word may also assume the meaning of a codified scripture when mentioned with other scriptures such as the Torah and Gospel.
The term also has closely related synonyms that are employed throughout the Quran. Each synonym possesses its own distinct meaning, but its use may converge with that of qurʾān in certain contexts. Such terms include kitāb (“book”); āyah (“sign”); and sūrah (“scripture”). The latter two terms also denote units of revelation. In the large majority of contexts, usually with a definite article (al-), the word is referred to as the “revelation” (wahy), that which has been “sent down” (tanzīl) at intervals. Other related words are: dhikr, meaning "remembrance," used to refer to the Quran in the sense of a reminder and warning; and ḥikma, meaning “wisdom”, sometimes referring to the revelation or part of it.
The Quran has many other names. Among those found in the text itself are al-furqān (“discernment” or “criterion”), al-hudah (“the guide”), ḏikrallāh (“the remembrance of God”), al-ḥikmah (“the wisdom”), and kalāmallāh (“the word of God”). Another term is al-kitāb (“the book”), though it is also used in the Arabic language for other scriptures, such as the Torah and the Gospels. The term muṣḥaf ("written work") is often used to refer to particular Quranic manuscripts but is also used in the Quran to identify earlier revealed books.
Islamic tradition relates that Muhammad received his first revelation in the Cave of Hira during one of his isolated retreats to the mountains. Thereafter, he received revelations over a period of twenty-three years. According to hadith and Muslim history, after Muhammad emigrated to Medina and formed an independent Muslim community, he ordered a considerable number of the sahabah to recite the Quran and to learn and teach the laws, which were revealed daily. Companions who engaged in the recitation of the Quran were called Qari. Since most sahabah were unable to read or write, they were ordered to learn from the prisoners-of-war the simple writing of the time. Thus a group of sahabah gradually became literate. As it was initially spoken, the Quran was recorded on tablets, bones and the wide, flat ends of date palm fronds. Most chapters were in use amongst early Muslims since they are mentioned in numerous sayings by both Sunni and Shia sources, relating Muhammad's use of the Quran as a call to Islam, the making of prayer and the manner of recitation. However, the Quran did not exist in book form at the time of Muhammad's death in 632.
Sahih Bukhari narrates Muhammad describing the revelations as, "Sometimes it is (revealed) like the ringing of a bell" and Aisha reported, "I saw the Prophet being inspired Divinely on a very cold day and noticed the sweat dropping from his forehead (as the Inspiration was over)". The Islamic studies scholar Welch states in the Encyclopaedia of Islam that he believes the graphic descriptions of Muhammad's condition at these moments may be regarded as genuine, because he was severely disturbed after these revelations. According to Welch, these seizures would have been seen by those around him as convincing evidence for the superhuman origin of Muhammad's inspirations. However, Muhammad's critics accused him of being a possessed man, a soothsayer or a magician since his experiences were similar to those claimed by such figures well known in ancient Arabia. Welch additionally states that it remains uncertain whether these experiences occurred before or after Muhammad's initial claim of prophethood.
According to Shias, Sufis and scarce Sunni scholars, Ali compiled a complete version of the Quran mus'haf immediately after Muhammad's death. The order of this mus'haf differed from that gathered later during Uthman's era. Despite this, Ali made no objection or resistance against standardized mus'haf, but kept his own book.
After seventy reciters were killed in the Battle of Yamama, the caliph Abu Bakr decided to collect the different chapters and verses into one volume. Thus, a group of reciters, including Zayd ibn Thabit, collected the chapters and verses and produced several hand-written copies of the complete book.
In about 650, as Islam expanded beyond the Arabian peninsula into Persia, the Levant and North Africa, the third caliph Uthman ibn Affan ordered the preparation of an official, standardized version, to preserve the sanctity of the text (and perhaps to keep the Rashidun Empire united, which became known as the Uthman Quran). Five reciters from amongst the companions produced a unique text from the first volume, which had been prepared on the orders of Abu Bakr and was kept with Hafsa bint Umar. The other copies already in the hands of Muslims in other areas were collected and sent to Medina where, on orders of the Caliph, they were destroyed by burning or boiling. This remains the authoritative text of the Quran to this day.
The Quran in its present form is generally considered by academic scholars to record the words spoken by Muhammad because the search for variants in Western academia has not yielded any differences of great significance. Historically, controversy over the Quran's content has rarely become an issue, although debates continue on the subject.
Muslims believe the Quran to be the book of divine guidance and direction for humanity and consider the text in its original Arabic to be the literal word of God, revealed to Muhammad through the angel Gabriel over a period of twenty-three years and view the Quran as God's final revelation to humanity.
Wahy in Islamic and Quranic concept means the act of God addressing an individual, conveying a message for a greater number of recipients. The process by which the divine message comes to the heart of a messenger of God is tanzil (to send down) or nuzul (to come down). As the Quran says, "With the truth we (God) have sent it down and with the truth it has come down." It designates positive religion, the letter of the revelation dictated by the angel to the prophet. It means to cause this revelation to descend from the higher world. According to hadith, the verses were sent down in special circumstances known as asbab al-nuzul. However, in this view God himself is never the subject of coming down.
The Quran frequently asserts in its text that it is divinely ordained, an assertion that Muslims believe. The Quran – often referring to its own textual nature and reflecting constantly on its assertion of divine origin – is the most meta-textual, self-referential religious text. The Quran refers to a written pre-text that records God's speech even before it was sent down.
The issue of whether the Quran is eternal or created was one of the crucial controversies among early Muslim theologians. Mu'tazilis believe it is created while the most widespread varieties of Muslim theologians consider the Quran to be eternal and uncreated. Sufi philosophers view the question as artificial or wrongly framed.
Muslims maintain the present wording of the Quranic text corresponds exactly to that revealed to Muhammad himself: as the words of God, said to be delivered to Muhammad through the angel Gabriel. Muslims consider the Quran to be a guide, a sign of the prophethood of Muhammad and the truth of the religion. They argue it is not possible for a human to produce a book like the Quran, as the Quran itself maintains.
Therefore an Islamic philosopher introduces a prophetology to explain how the divine word passes into human expression. This leads to a kind of esoteric hermeneutics that seeks to comprehend the position of the prophet by mediating on the modality of his relationship not with his own time, but with the eternal source his message emanates from. This view contrasts with historical critique of western scholars who attempt to understand the prophet through his circumstances, education and type of genius.
Muslims believe that the Quran is different from all other books in ways that are impossible for any other book to be, such that similar texts cannot be written by humans. These include both mundane and miraculous claims. The Quran itself challenges any who disagree with its divine origin to produce a text of a miraculous nature.
Scholars of Islam believe that its poetic form is unique and of a fashion that cannot be written by humans. They also claim it contains accurate prophecy and that no other book does.
The text of the Quran consists of 114 chapters of varying lengths, each known as a sura. Chapters are classed as Meccan or Medinan, depending on when (before or after Hijra) the verses were revealed. Chapter titles are derived from a name or quality discussed in the text, or from the first letters or words of the sura. Muslims believe that Muhammad, on God's command, gave the chapters their names. Generally, longer chapters appear earlier in the Quran, while the shorter ones appear later. The chapter arrangement is thus not connected to the sequence of revelation. Each sura except the ninth starts with the Bismillah, an Arabic phrase meaning (“In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful”). There are, however, still 114 occurrences of the bismillah in the Quran, due to its presence in verse 27:30 as the opening of Solomon's letter to the Queen of Sheba.
Each sura is formed from several ayat (verses), which originally means a sign or portent sent by God. The number of verses differ from chapter to chapter. An individual verse may be just a few letters or several lines. The verses are unlike the highly refined poetry of the pre-Islamic Arabs in their content and distinctive rhymes and rhythms, being more akin to the prophetic utterances marked by inspired discontinuities found in the sacred scriptures of Judaism and Christianity. The actual number of ayat has been a controversial issue among Muslim scholars since Islam's inception, some recognizing 6,000, some 6,204, some 6,219, and some 6,236, although the words in all cases are the same. The most popular edition of the Quran, which is based on the Kufa school tradition, contains 6,236 ayat.
There is a crosscutting division into 30 parts of roughly equal division, ajza, each containing two units called ahzab, each of which is divided into four parts (rub 'al-ahzab). The Quran is also divided into seven approximately equal parts, manazil, for it to be recited in a week.
The Quranic text seems to have no beginning, middle, or end, its nonlinear structure being akin to a web or net. The textual arrangement is sometimes considered to have lack of continuity, absence of any chronological or thematic order, and presence of repetition.
Fourteen different Arabic letters form 14 different sets of “Quranic Initials” (the "Muqatta'at", such as A.L.M. of 2:1) and prefix 29 suras in the Quran. The meaning and interpretation of these initials is considered unknown to most Muslims.
The Quranic verses contain general exhortations regarding right and wrong and the nature of revelation.
Historical events are related to outline general moral lessons.
Verses pertaining to natural phenomena have been interpreted by Muslims as an indication of the authenticity of the Quranic message.
The Quran's message is conveyed with various literary structures and devices. In the original Arabic, the chapters and verses employ phonetic and thematic structures that assist the audience's efforts to recall the message of the text. Muslims[who?] assert (according to the Quran itself) that the Quranic content and style is inimitable.
Richard Gottheil and Siegmund Fränkel in the Jewish Encyclopedia write that the oldest portions of the Quran reflect significant excitement in their language, through short and abrupt sentences and sudden transitions. The Quran nonetheless carefully maintains the rhymed form, like the oracles. Some later portions also preserve this form but also in a style where the movement is calm and the style expository.[verification needed]
Michael Sells, citing the work of the critic Norman O. Brown, acknowledges Brown's observation that the seeming "disorganization" of Quranic literary expression – its "scattered or fragmented mode of composition," in Sells's phrase – is in fact a literary device capable of delivering "profound effects – as if the intensity of the prophetic message were shattering the vehicle of human language in which it was being communicated." Sells also addresses the much-discussed "repetitiveness" of the Quran, seeing this, too, as a literary device.
The Quran has sparked a huge body of commentary and explication (tafsir), aimed at explaining the "meanings of the Quranic verses, clarifying their import and finding out their significance."
Tafsir is one of the earliest academic activities of Muslims. According to the Quran, Muhammad was the first person who described the meanings of verses for early Muslims. Other early exegetes included a few Companions of Muhammad, like Ali ibn Abi Talib, Abdullah ibn Abbas, Abdullah ibn Umar and Ubayy ibn Kab. Exegesis in those days was confined to the explanation of literary aspects of the verse, the background of its revelation and, occasionally, interpretation of one verse with the help of the other. If the verse was about a historical event, then sometimes a few traditions (hadith) of Muhammad were narrated to make its meaning clear.
Because the Quran is spoken in classical Arabic, many of the later converts to Islam (mostly non-Arabs) did not always understand the Quranic Arabic, they did not catch allusions that were clear to early Muslims fluent in Arabic and they were concerned with reconciling apparent conflict of themes in the Quran. Commentators erudite in Arabic explained the allusions, and perhaps most importantly, explained which Quranic verses had been revealed early in Muhammad's prophetic career, as being appropriate to the very earliest Muslim community, and which had been revealed later, canceling out or "abrogating" (nasikh) the earlier text (mansukh). Other scholars, however, maintain that no abrogation has taken place in the Qur'an.
Ja'far Kashfi defines ta'wil as 'to lead back or to bring something back to its origin or archetype'. It is a science whose pivot is a spiritual direction and a divine inspiration, while the tafsir is the literal exegesis of the letter; its pivot is the canonical Islamic sciences. Muhammad Husayn Tabatabaei says that according to the popular explanation among the later exegetes, ta'wil indicates the particular meaning a verse is directed towards. The meaning of revelation (tanzil), as opposed to ta'wil, is clear in its accordance to the obvious meaning of the words as they were revealed. But this explanation has become so widespread that, at present, it has become the primary meaning of ta'wil, which originally meant "to return" or "the returning place". In Tabatabaei's view, what has been rightly called ta'wil, or hermeneutic interpretation of the Quran, is not concerned simply with the denotation of words. Rather, it is concerned with certain truths and realities that transcend the comprehension of the common run of men; yet it is from these truths and realities that the principles of doctrine and the practical injunctions of the Quran issue forth. Interpretation is not the meaning of the verse; rather it transpires through that meaning – a special sort of transpiration. There is a spiritual reality, which is the main objective of ordaining a law, or the basic aim in describing a divine attribute—and there is an actual significance a Quranic story refers to.
According to Shia beliefs, those who are firmly rooted in knowledge like the Prophet and the imams know the secrets of the Quran. According to Tabatabaei, the statement "none knows its interpretation except Allah"(3:7 ) remains valid, without any opposing or qualifying clause. Therefore, so far as this verse is concerned, the knowledge of the Quran's interpretation is reserved for God. But Tabatabaei uses other verses and concludes that those who are purified by God know the interpretation of the Quran to a certain extent. As Corbin narrates from Shia sources, Ali himself gives this testimony:
Not a single verse of the Quran descended upon (was revealed to) the Messenger of God, which he did not proceed to dictate to me and make me recite. I would write it with my own hand, and he would instruct me as to its tafsir (the literal explanation) and the ta'wil (the spiritual exegesis), the nasikh (the verse that abrogates) and the mansukh (the abrogated verse), the muhkam (without ambiguity) and the mutashabih (ambiguous), the particular and the general...
According to Tabatabaei, there are acceptable and unacceptable esoteric interpretations. Acceptable ta'wil refers to the meaning of a verse beyond its literal meaning; rather the implicit meaning, which ultimately is known only to God and can't be comprehended directly through human thought alone. The verses in question here refer to the human qualities of coming, going, sitting, satisfaction, anger, and sorrow, which are apparently attributed to God. Unacceptable ta'wil is where one "transfers" the apparent meaning of a verse to a different meaning by means of a proof; this method is not without obvious inconsistencies. Although this unacceptable ta'wil has gained considerable acceptance, it is incorrect and cannot be applied to the Quranic verses. The correct interpretation is that reality a verse refers to. It is found in all verses, the decisive and the ambiguous alike; it is not a sort of a meaning of the word; it is a fact that is too sublime for words. God has dressed them with words to bring them a bit nearer to our minds; in this respect they are like proverbs that are used to create a picture in the mind, and thus help the hearer to clearly grasp the intended idea.
Therefore Sufi spiritual interpretations are usually accepted by Islamic scholars as authentic, as long as certain conditions are met. In Sufi history, these interpretations were sometimes considered religious innovations (bid'ah), as Salafis believe today. However, ta'wil is extremely controversial even amongst Shia. For example, when Ayatollah Ruhallah Khomeini, the leader of Islamic revolution, gave some lectures about Sura al-Fatiha in December 1979 and January 1980, protests forced him to suspend them before he could continue beyond the first two verses of the surah.
Unlike the Salafis and Zahiri, Shias and Sufis as well as some other Muslim philosophers believe the meaning of the Quran is not restricted to the literal aspect. For them, it is an essential idea that the Quran also has inward aspects. Henry Corbin narrates a hadith that goes back to Muhammad:
"The Qur'an possesses an external appearance and a hidden depth, an exoteric meaning and an esoteric meaning. This esoteric meaning in turn conceals an esoteric meaning (this depth possesses a depth, after the image of the celestial Spheres, which are enclosed within each other). So it goes on for seven esoteric meanings (seven depths of hidden depth)."
According to this view, it has also become evident that the inner meaning of the Quran does not eradicate or invalidate its outward meaning. Rather, it is like the soul, which gives life to the body. Corbin considers the Quran to play a part in Islamic philosophy, because gnosiology itself goes hand in hand with prophetology.
Commentaries dealing with the zahir (outward aspects) of the text are called tafsir, and hermeneutic and esoteric commentaries dealing with the batin are called ta'wil (“interpretation” or “explanation”), which involves taking the text back to its beginning. Commentators with an esoteric slant believe that the ultimate meaning of the Quran is known only to God. In contrast, Quranic literalism, followed by Salafis and Zahiris, is the belief that the Quran should only be taken at its apparent meaning.
Translation of the Quran has always been a problematic and difficult issue. Many argue that the Quranic text cannot be reproduced in another language or form. Furthermore, an Arabic word may have a range of meanings depending on the context, making an accurate translation even more difficult.
Nevertheless, the Quran has been translated into most African, Asian and European languages. The first translator of the Quran was Salman the Persian, who translated sura Al-Fatiha into Persian during the 7th century. The first complete translation of the Quran was completed in 884 CE in Alwar (Sindh, India now Pakistan) by the orders of Abdullah bin Umar bin Abdul Aziz on the request of the Hindu Raja Mehruk. The first complete translation of Quran was into Persian during the reign of Samanids in the 9th century. Islamic tradition holds that translations were made for Emperor Negus of Abyssinia and Byzantine Emperor Heraclius, as both received letters by Muhammad containing verses from the Quran. In early centuries, the permissibility of translations was not an issue, but whether one could use translations in prayer.
In 1936, translations in 102 languages were known. In 2010, the Hürriyet Daily News and Economic Review reported that the Quran was presented in 112 languages at the 18th International Quran Exhibition in Tehran.
Robert of Ketton's 1143 translation of the Quran for Peter the Venerable, Lex Mahumet pseudoprophete, was the first into a Western language (Latin). Alexander Ross offered the first English version in 1649, from the French translation of L'Alcoran de Mahomet (1647) by Andre du Ryer. In 1734, George Sale produced the first scholarly translation of the Quran into English; another was produced by Richard Bell in 1937, and yet another by Arthur John Arberry in 1955. All these translators were non-Muslims. There have been numerous translations by Muslims.
The English translators have sometimes favored archaic English words and constructions over their more modern or conventional equivalents; for example, two widely read translators, A. Yusuf Ali and M. Marmaduke Pickthall, use the plural and singular "ye" and "thou" instead of the more common "you".
In addition to and largely independent of the division into suras, there are various ways of dividing the Quran into parts of approximately equal length for convenience in reading, recitation and memorization. The thirty ajza can be used to read through the entire Quran in a week or a month. Some of these parts are known by names and these names are the first few words by which the juz' starts. A juz' is sometimes further divided into two ahzab, and each hizb subdivided into four rub 'al-ahzab. A different structure is provided by the ruku'at, semantical units resembling paragraphs and comprising roughly ten ayat each. Some also divide the Quran into seven manazil to facilitate complete recitation in a week.
|“||...and recite the Quran in slow, measured rhythmic tones.||”|
One meaning of Quran is "recitation". Tajwid, an Arabic word for elocution, is a set of rules that governs how the Quran should be recited and is assessed in terms of how accessible the recitation is to those intent on concentrating on the words.
To perform salat (prayer), a mandatory obligation in Islam, a Muslim is required to learn at least some sura of the Quran (typically starting with the first one, al-Fatiha, known as the "seven oft-repeated verses," and then moving on to the shorter ones at the end). Until one has learned al-Fatiha, a Muslim can only say phrases like "praise be to God" during the salat.
A person whose recital repertoire encompasses the whole Quran is called a qari', whereas a memoriser of the Quran is called a hafiz (fem. Hafaz) (which translate as "reciter" or "protector," respectively). Muhammad is regarded as the first qari' since he was the first to recite it. Recitation (tilawa تلاوة) of the Quran is a fine art in the Muslim world.
There are several schools of Quranic recitation, all of which teach possible pronunciations of the Uthmanic rasm: Seven reliable, three permissible and (at least) four uncanonical – in 8 sub-traditions each – making for 80 recitation variants altogether. A canonical recitation must satisfy three conditions:
These recitations differ in the vocalization (tashkil) of a few words, which in turn gives a complementary meaning to the word in question according to the rules of Arabic grammar. For example, the vocalization of a verb can change its active and passive voice. It can also change its stem formation, implying intensity for example. Vowels may be elongated or shortened, and glottal stops (hamzas) may be added or dropped, according to the respective rules of the particular recitation. For example, the name of archangel Gabriel is pronounced differently in different recitations: Jibrīl, Jabrīl, Jibra'īl, and Jibra'il.
The more widely used narrations are those of Hafs (حفص عن عاصم), Warsh (ورش عن نافع), Qaloon (قالون عن نافع) and Al-Duri according to Abu `Amr (الدوري عن أبي عمرو). Muslims firmly believe that all canonical recitations were recited by Muhammad himself, citing the respective isnad chain of narration, and accept them as valid for worshipping and as a reference for rules of Sharia. The uncanonical recitations are called "explanatory" for their role in giving a different perspective for a given verse or ayah. Today several dozen persons hold the title "Memorizer of the Ten Recitations."
Many reports contradict the presence of variant readings:
Javed Ahmad Ghamidi also purports that there is only one recitation of Quran, which is called Qira'at of Hafss or in classical scholarship, it is called Qira'at al-'ammah. The Quran has also specified that it was revealed in the language of Muhammad's tribe: the Quraysh.[Quran 19:97][Quran 44:58]
However, the identification of the recitation of Hafss as the Qira'at al-'ammah is somewhat problematic when that was the recitation of the people of Kufa in Iraq, and there is better reason to identify the recitation of the reciters of Madinah as the dominant recitation. The reciter of Madinah was Nafi' and Imam Malik remarked "The recitation of Nafi' is Sunnah."
AZ [however] says that the people of El-Hijaz and Hudhayl, and the people of Makkah and Al-Madinah, to not pronounce hamzah [at all]: and 'Isa Ibn-'Omar says, Tamim pronounce hamzah, and the people of Al-Hijaz, in cases of necessity, [in poetry,] do so.
Most Muslims today use printed editions of the Quran. There are many editions, large and small, elaborate or plain, expensive or inexpensive. Bilingual forms with the Arabic on one side and a gloss into a more familiar language on the other are very popular.
Qurans are produced in many different sizes. Most are of a reasonable book size, but there exist extremely large Qurans (usually for display purposes) and very small Qurans (sometimes given as gifts).
An Illuminated Quran from the library of Tippoo Ṣāḥib was presented to the University of Cambridge by the Court of Directors of the East India Company in 1806. The volume has two decorated medallions and two magnificent headpieces containing Al-Fatiha. The text of the Quran is followed by some prayers, and a Fal-nāmah. The manuscript is not dated, but dates of ownership of 1028 A.H./1618 C.E. and 1066 A.H./1655 C.E. occur at the beginning.
Before printing was widely adopted in the 19th century, the Quran was transmitted in manuscript books made by copyists and calligraphers. Short extracts from the Quran were printed in the medieval period from carved wooden blocks, one block per page; a technique already widely used in China. However there are no records of complete Qurans produced in this way, which would have involved a very large investment. Mass-produced less expensive versions of the Quran were produced from the 19th century by lithography, which allowed reproduction of the fine calligraphy of hand-made versions.
The oldest surviving Quran printed with movable type was produced in Venice in 1537/1538. It seems to have been prepared for sale in the Ottoman empire, where all movable type printing using Arabic characters had been forbidden in 1485. This decree was reversed in 1588, but there remained strong resistance to adopting movable type printing for any subjects, let alone the Quran, until the late 19th century. This seems to have been partly from opposition by the large profession of copyists, and for aesthetic reasons, and fear of mistakes in the text. Catherine the Great of Russia sponsored a printing of the Quran in 1787. This was followed by editions from Kazan (1828), Persia (1833) and Istanbul (1877).
It is extremely difficult to render the full Quran, with all the points, in computer code, such as Unicode. The Internet Sacred Text Archive makes computer files of the Quran freely available both as images and in a temporary Unicode version. Various designers and software firms have attempted to develop computer fonts that can adequately render the Quran.
Since Muslim tradition felt that directly portraying sacred figures and events might lead to idolatry, it was considered wrong to decorate the Quran with pictures (as was often done for Christian texts, for example). Muslims instead lavished love and care upon the sacred text itself. Arabic is written in many scripts, some of which are complex and beautiful. Arabic calligraphy is a highly honored art, much like Chinese calligraphy. Muslims also decorated their Qurans with abstract figures (arabesques), colored inks, and gold leaf. Pages from some of these antique Qurans are displayed throughout this article.
|“||It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment between right and wrong).||”|
The Quran speaks well of the relationship it has with former books (the Torah and the Gospel) and attributes their similarities to their unique origin and saying all of them have been revealed by the one God.
According to Sahih Bukhari, the Quran was recited among Levantines and Iraqis, and discussed by Christians and Jews before it was standardized. Its language was similar to the Syriac language. The Quran recounts stories of many of the people and events recounted in Jewish and Christian sacred books (Tanakh, Bible) and devotional literature (Apocrypha, Midrash), although it differs in many details. Adam, Enoch, Noah, Eber, Shelah, Abraham, Lot, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Job, Jethro, David, Solomon, Elijah, Elisha, Jonah, Aaron, Moses, Zechariah, John the Baptist, and Jesus are mentioned in the Quran as prophets of God (see Prophets of Islam). In fact, Moses is mentioned more in the Quran than any other individual. Jesus is mentioned more often in the Quran than Muhammad while Mary is mentioned in the Quran more than the New Testament. Muslims believe the common elements or resemblances between the Bible and other Jewish and Christian writings and Islamic dispensations is due to their common divine source, and that the original Christian or Jewish texts were authentic divine revelations given to prophets.
The Quran has been noted to have certain narratives similarities to the Diatessaron, Protoevangelium of James, Infancy Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew and the Arabic Infancy Gospel. One scholar has suggested that the Diatessaron, as a gospel harmony, may have led to the conception that the Christian Gospel is one text.
Although Arabic, as a language and a literary tradition, was quite well developed by the time of Muhammad's prophetic activity, it was only after the emergence of Islam, with its founding scripture in Arabic, that the language reached its utmost capacity of expression, and the literature its highest point of complexity and sophistication. Indeed, it probably is no exaggeration to say that the Quran was one of the most conspicuous forces in the making of classical and post-classical Arabic literature.
The main areas in which the Qur'an exerted noticeable influence on Arabic literature are diction and themes; other areas are related to the literary aspects of the Qur'an particularly oaths (q.v.), metaphors, motifs, and symbols. As far as diction is concerned, one could say that Qur'anic words, idioms, and expressions, especially "loaded" and formulaic phrases, appear in practically all genres of literature and in such abundance that it is simply impossible to compile a full record of them. For not only did the Qur'an create an entirely new linguistic corpus to express its message, it also endowed old, pre-Islamic words with new meanings and it is these meanings that took root in the language and subsequently in the literature...
Many Muslims memorize at least some portion of the Quran in the original Arabic, usually at least the verses needed to perform the contact prayers (solat). Those who have memorized the entire Quran earn the right to the title of Hafiz.
The text of the Quran has become readily accessible over the internet, in Arabic as well as numerous translations in other languages. It can be downloaded and searched both word-by-word and with Boolean algebra. Photos of ancient manuscripts and illustrations of Quranic art can be witnessed. However, there are still limits to searching the Arabic text of the Quran.
Most Muslims treat paper copies of the Quran with reverence. Based on tradition and a literal interpretation of sura 56:77–79: "That this is indeed a Quran Most Honourable, In a Book well-guarded, Which none shall touch but those who are clean", many scholars believe that a Muslim must perform a ritual cleansing with water (wudu) before touching a copy of the Quran, or mus'haf, although this view is not universal.
Defiling or dismembering copies of the Quran is considered Quran desecration. Pulping, recycling, or otherwise discarding worn-out copies of the text is forbidden. Worn-out, torn, or errant (for example, pages out of order) Qurans are left free to flow in a river, kept somewhere safe, burned, or buried in a remote location.
|Find more about Quran on Wikipedia's sister projects:|
|Definitions and translations from Wiktionary|
|Images and media from Commons|
|Learning resources from Wikiversity|
|News stories from Wikinews|
|Quotations from Wikiquote|
|Source texts from Wikisource|
|Textbooks from Wikibooks|
|The Qur'an - Sura||Next sura:|
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114


How to determine which vibrational modes are IR-active?
- STEP 1: Find the reducible representation for all normal modes Γ m o d e s. STEP 2: Break Γ m o d e s into its component irreducible representations. STEP 3: Subtract rotations and translations to find vibrational modes. STEP 4: Determine which of the vibrational modes are IR-active and Raman-active.
- 1 How do you calculate the number of vibrations?
- 2 How do you measure IR active stretch?
- 3 What is stretching vibrations in IR spectroscopy?
- 4 What determines stretching frequency?
- 5 How do you calculate the vibrational period?
- 6 What is the number of vibrational modes?
- 7 Which vibrational modes are IR active?
- 8 Is ch4 IR active?
- 9 How many normal modes of vibration are IR active for?
- 10 How do you know if compounds are IR active?
- 11 Is asymmetric stretching IR active?
- 12 How much stretching is enough?
- 13 How many types of stretching vibrations are there?
- 14 How many repetitions of a stretch are needed?
How do you calculate the number of vibrations?
The number of vibrational normal modes can be determined for any molecule from the formula given above. For a diatomic molecule, N = 2 so the number of modes is 3×2−5=1. For a triatomic linear molecule (CO2), it is 3×3−5=4 and triatomic nonlinear molecule (H2O), it is 3×3−6=3 and so on.
How do you measure IR active stretch?
In order to determine which modes are IR active, a simple check of the irreducible representation that corresponds to x,y and z and a cross check with the reducible representation Γvib is necessary. If they contain the same irreducible representation, the mode is IR active.
What is stretching vibrations in IR spectroscopy?
When there is a continuous change in the interatomic distance along the axis of the bond between two atoms, this process is known as a stretching vibration. A change in the angle occurring between two bonds is known as a bending vibration. Four bending vibrations exist namely, wagging, twisting, rocking and scissoring.
What determines stretching frequency?
The exact frequency at which a given vibration occurs is determined by the strengths of the bonds involved and the mass of the component atoms. bond stretching are usually very strong because a large change in the dipole takes place in that mode.
How do you calculate the vibrational period?
Period refers to the time for something to happen and is measured in seconds/cycle. In this case, there are 11 seconds per 33 vibrational cycles. Thus the period is (11 s) / (33 cycles) = 0.33 seconds.
What is the number of vibrational modes?
The normal modes of vibration are: asymmetric, symmetric, wagging, twisting, scissoring, and rocking for polyatomic molecules. Figure 1: Six types of Vibrational Modes.
Which vibrational modes are IR active?
If a vibration results in the change in the molecular dipole moment, it is IR-active. In the character table, we can recognize the vibrational modes that are IR-active by those with symmetry of the x,y, and z axes. In C2v, any vibrations with A1, B1 or B2 symmetry would be IR-active.
Is ch4 IR active?
The 4 C-H bonds in methane are identical. They couple together to give 4 normal modes. 3 of these normal modes are degenerate. These 3 are infrared active but occur at the same frequency.
How many normal modes of vibration are IR active for?
Water has three normal modes of vibration, all of which are IR active.
How do you know if compounds are IR active?
In order for a vibrational mode to absorb infrared light, it must result in a periodic change in the dipole moment of the molecule. Such vibrations are said to be infrared active. In general, the greater the polarity of the bond, the stronger its IR absorption.
Is asymmetric stretching IR active?
The asymmetric stretch of carbon dioxide is IR active because there is a change in the net molecular dipole (Figure 5. 2). In the asymmetric stretch, one bond is stretched and is now more polarizable while the other bond is compressed and is less polarizable.
How much stretching is enough?
Healthy adults should do flexibility exercises (stretches, yoga, or tai chi) for all major muscle-tendon groups—neck, shoulders, chest, trunk, lower back, hips, legs, and ankles—at least two to three times a week. For optimal results, you should spend a total of 60 seconds on each stretching exercise.
How many types of stretching vibrations are there?
There are two types of stretching vibrations. Symmetric stretching and asymmetric stretching.
How many repetitions of a stretch are needed?
Each stretch should be held 15-30 seconds and repeated 2 to 4 times. Many exercise studies on older adults include stretching exercises as part of a well-rounded exercise program.


Academic journal article
By Garcia, Jorge G.; Krankowski, Theresa; Jones, Laura L.
Professional School Counseling , Vol. 2, No. 1
Brain injury is generally considered the leading cause of mortality and disability in children and youth (Savage & Wolcott, 1994). Each year one million children are taken to emergency rooms with traumatic brain injuries resulting from motor vehicle collisions, falls, sports, and abuse. Other nontraumatic brain injuries occur from anoxia (e.g., near drowning, strangulation, choking), infections (e.g., encephalitis, meningitis), tumors, strokes and other vascular accidents, neurotoxic poisoning, and metabolic disorders (Savage, 1997). Brain injuries to children between birth and 19 years of age annually result in 7,000 deaths and 150,000 hospitalizations. About 30,000 have a permanent disability after the injury each year (Savage, 1997).
Young males have the highest incidence rates of traumatic brain injury of any group. Some studies have shown that males under the age of 18 have a 1.6% chance of sustaining a brain injury each year (Forkosch, Kaye, & LaPlante, 1996), which is significantly higher than any other group. Recent data indicate that firearms are the most common cause of fatality due to brain injury in adolescents, surpassing the rate due to motor vehicle accidents associated with alcohol consumption (Sege, 1994; Forkosch et al., 1996).
Prior to the 1990 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), students with brain injuries were often misclassified, inappropriately placed, and under served. Since the passage of IDEA, these students have been identified as falling under a separate category of disability. It is the purpose of this paper to address the unique sequelae these youth manifest and present a summary of cognitive, psychosocial, behavioral, and educational interventions that school counselors and educational personnel may employ to enhance their school adjustment. The roles that school counselors assume in this process is also discussed and analyzed. In a separate section, the authors present a summary of key multicultural considerations in the design and implementation of these interventions.
Types of Interventions
Different authors have summarized some of the cognitive deficits that affect educational performance in children with a brain injury (Lazar & Menaldino, 1995; Lord-Maez & Obrzut, 1996). These deficits include memory and learning impairments. A reduced capacity for new learning can severely impair the ability to perform in school, and this impairment may become more problematic over time. The speed of information processing is also slower, which compounds the problem and adds to the difficulties these children have in dealing with daily school demands. Lazar and Menaldino (1995) focused on the interaction of injury and developmental stage and concluded that cognitive deficits appear to become more evident with maturation, when the demands become more complex. As a result, ongoing intervention and support need to be provided to students throughout their school life.
Ylvisacker et al. (1995) suggest four levels of cognitive functioning in children after a brain injury, with corresponding cognitive tasks and interventions. Level one implies dependency on external support even for routine tasks. Level two requires the use of memory supports such as checklists, photos, log books, and graphic organizers. At level three, the student receives minor prompting to use organizing, planning, and memory aids and is expected to perform independently. Finally, level four indicates performance within normal limits, with no need for external support.
Many authors describe the use of microcomputers in cognitive remediation (Begali,1992; Gianutsos, 1992; Matthews, Preston, & Malec, 1991; Ylvisacker et al., 1995). Thomas-Stonell, Johnson, Schuller, Schuller, and Jutai (1994) evaluated a computer-based program (TEACHware) aimed at helping remediate cognitive/communication skills in children with brain injury. …


This is a power point for levels who are able to make questions and answers in present continuous. This contains some questions with pictures to answer yes or no with complete answers. It is useful for CCQ (Concept Check Questions) part, after the main part of teaching. You can ask one of the student to respond to each slide to make sure they understand and use the tense correctly. Hope you find it practical.


"Sona kitna sona hai, sone ko karta mera mann"
Really, one of the most important activities of our daily routine is sleep. Some people live to eat, others to sleep. An average human should get at least 7 to 8 hours of sleep. However, we end up sleeping for fewer hours due to a hectic schedule, But we all love to sleep. So, to celebrate our love for this activity, here are 13 facts about sleeping.
1. Usually, any person falls asleep within 7 minutes.
2. Women sleep more than men because they are multitaskers, which means, their brains work harder.
3. Parents of newborns lose about 6 months of sleep in the first 2 years of childbirth.
4. Newborn babies sleep 15-16 hours a day.
5. Humans are the only creatures who can willingly delay sleeping.
6. Stress, physical or mental illness, way of living and sleeping, family history, your shift timings, diet, exercise habits, all these can be the cause of insomnia.
7. Being constantly awake for 16 hours has a bad effect on your work.
8. Working continuously without sleep can make you feel hungry because of leptin imbalances. It is the Appetite-Regulating Hormone.
9. Regular exercise helps in getting good and regular sleep.
10. Only 15% of people had colour dreams before the advent of colour TV.
11. On average, a person has 4-7 dreams a night. 90% of people forget their dreams.
12. A person spends 1/3 of his or her life in sleep.
13. Sleeping less than 7 hours at night can make you angry, sad and worried.


"This book is Gamow at his best, which means the very best in science for the layman." — Library Journal
Widely recognized as one of the 20th century's foremost physicists, George Gamow was also an unusually capable popularizer of science. His talents are vividly revealed in this exciting and penetrating explanation of how the central laws of physical science evolved — from Pythagoras' discovery of frequency ratios in the 6th century B.C. to today's research on elementary particles.
Unlike many books on physics which focus entirely on fact and theory with little or no historic detail, the present work incorporates fascinating personal and biographical data about the great physicists of past and present. Thus Dr. Gamow discusses on an equal basis the trail of Galileo and the basic laws of mechanics which he discovered, or gives his personal recollections about Niels Bohr along with detailed discussion of Bohr's atomic model. You'll also find revealing glimpses of Newton, Huygens, Heisenberg, Pauli, Einstein, and many other immortals of science.
Each chapter is centered around a single great figure, or at most two, with other physicists of the era and their contributions forming a background. Major topics include the dawn of physics, the Dark Ages and the Renaissance, Newtonian physics, heat as energy, electricity, the relativistic revolution, quantum theory, and the atomic nucleus and elementary particles.
As Dr. Gamow points out in the Preface, the aim of this book is to give the reader the feeling of what physics is, and what kind of people physicists are. This delightfully informal approach, combined with the book's clear, easy-to-follow explanations, will especially appeal to young readers but will stimulate and entertain science enthusiasts of all ages. 1961 edition.
"The whole thing is a tour de force covering all the important landmarks." — Guardian
Reprint of The Biography of Physics, Harper & Row, New York, 1961.
Modern Science Made Easy
By one of the leading physicists of the twentieth century, George Gamow's One, Two, Three…Infinity is one of the most memorable popular books on physics, mathematics, and science generally ever written, famous for having, directly or indirectly, launched the academic and/or scientific careers of many young people whose first real encounter with the wonders and mysteries of mathematics and science was through reading this book as a teenager. Untypically for popular science books, this one is enhanced by the author's own delightful sketches. Reviewers were enthusiastic when One, Two, Three…Infinity was published in 1947.
In the Author's Own Words:
"If and when all the laws governing physical phenomena are finally discovered, and all the empirical constants occurring in these laws are finally expressed through the four independent basic constants, we will be able to say that physical science has reached its end, that no excitement is left in further explorations, and that all that remains to a physicist is either tedious work on minor details or the self-educational study and adoration of the magnificence of the completed system. At that stage physical science will enter from the epoch of Columbus and Magellan into the epoch of the National Geographic Magazine!" — George Gamow
Critical Acclaim for One, Two, Three…Infinity:
"This skillful presentation is for the non-professional and professional scientist. It will broaden the knowledge of each and give the imagination wide play." — Chemistry and Engineering News
"A stimulating and provocative book for the science-minded layman." — Kirkus Reviews
"This is a layman's book as readable as a historical novel, but every chapter bears the solid imprint of authoritative research." — San Francisco Chronice
"George Gamow succeeds where others fail because of his remarkable ability to combine technical accuracy, choice of material, dignity of expression, and readability." — Saturday Review of Literature
|Availability||Usually ships in 24 to 48 hours|
|Dimensions||5 3/8 x 8 1/2|
--!Google Universal Analytics Code!-->


Benefits of Student-Led Learning
Traditional classrooms center on teacher-led learning: the teacher sets all goals, plans all lessons, and generally runs a tight ship. Advocates of this approach, if it ever occurs to them there might be any alternative, say teacher-led classes are more orderly and keep the learning focused on well-considered goals and purposes.
Of course, if the only other option is letting students do exactly as they please, the teacher-led approach makes sense. However, true student-led learning—despite images the term may evoke when first heard—doesn’t mean giving the kids blanket permission to take over. It simply means keeping things flexible enough to meet individual student needs, including the needs to take initiative and have a voice. (Because of the potential confusion, many educators prefer to call this approach student-centered learning or learner-centered education.)
There are reasons to believe that student-led learning is actually more effective:
- By reducing the risk of students being labeled “bad at schoolwork” or “not too smart” or even “gifted,” student-led learning helps kids understand that “potential” is not reserved for a chosen few. (Anyone who has tried to motivate a teenager who considers him- or herself “dumb,” or even worked with the “smart” kid who has a secret inferiority complex over not always getting 100%, should easily see the problems with judging by academic achievement.)
- Student-led learning gives kids permission to make mistakes and to “try, try again,” which leads to greater achievements than attempting only what promises quick success.
- Student-led learning encourages children to think for themselves, rather than simply following instructions, from an early age.
- Student-led learning provides for a broader range of skill development and learning styles than do academic approaches which impose a narrow list of predetermined priorities.
- Student-led learning makes the classroom less of an “institution” and more of a community, encouraging all-around mutual support rather than competition and bullying.
- Student-led learning makes kids partners in their own education, which translates to higher levels of cooperation and interest. When kids who once came to school because “grownups say I have to” start showing up eager for more, you’re seeing one major benefit of student-led learning.
Ideas for Making Your Classroom More “Student-Led”
- Let it be known that anyone can ask a question at any time, and that there’s no such thing as a dumb question.
- When you catch shyer students looking interested, encourage them to share their thoughts.
- Whenever possible, assign “write out/work out your answer” questions instead of multiple choice. Even with math problems, avoid pushing “the way to solve it”; give kids a chance to find their own paths to the solution.
- Provide kids with plenty of opportunities to design their own learning projects and to work on these in class.
- Provide opportunities to work as teams and contribute to the classroom as a whole.
- Tolerate no subtle belittling of any student—from classmates or from yourself.
- If someone is having real difficulty, ask him or her privately if anything else is wrong—you might catch a medical or personal problem before it escalates into tragedy. (Remember, a key point of student-led learning is meeting the full spectrum of student needs.)


The More Things Change, Cash Remains
Today the Federal Reserve’s Cash Product Office released preliminary findings from the 2015 Diary of Consumer Payment Choice. The study shows that while new payment options are emerging and gaining popularity, cash is still the most frequently used retail payment instrument.
In 2012, and again in 2015, the Federal Reserve’s Cash Product Office, along with the Federal Reserve Banks of Boston and Richmond, conducted this national survey to understand how consumers use cash, credit cards, debit cards, checks, and mobile and online apps to pay for everything from their daily cup of joe to their monthly rent or mortgage.
Even in a world of swipe, tap, and click to pay, cash is resilient and plays a unique role for consumers. It’s widely used in a variety of circumstances across all demographics and dominates small-value transactions.
Data from the 2015 Diary shows that cash was used for 32 percent of all reported transactions, including bill payments, followed by debit cards (27 percent) and credit cards (21 percent). Cash’s presence is particularly strong in small-value purchases, where it was used more than 60 percent of the time for transactions under $10. Cash is a “go-to” choice for everything from food and personal care supplies, to gifts, entertainment, and transportation.
As consumers’ shopping behavior evolves with more online purchases and new payment apps, cash faces competition at the point-of-sale, but it remains a highly valued and useful choice.
You may also be interested in:
- Cash Myths Busted
- Notes on the Go: Currency in Circulation Explained
- How You Shop Affects How You Pay
The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the management of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco or of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.


The main function of Congress is undoubtedly the power of the purse. To exercise that power, Congress has to adhere to a set of procedures designated in the Budget Act of 1974, and to enact 12 annual stand-alone spending bills. This has not happened in two decades; 1994 was the last time the process was completed. Instead the annual budget has become a battleground between the Administration and Congress. To avoid the severe effects of government shutdowns as a result of the failure to enact appropriations legislation, both the Legislative and Executive Branches tacitly agree to the regular use of continuing resolutions and omnibuses to complete their work on the annual budget. However, while these practices provide short-term solutions they create severe distortions in budget policy for the medium and long run. Implementing a biennial budget as part of a comprehensive budget reform might reduce the negative implications of CRs and omnibuses on the performance of agencies and Congress. Starting from the assumption that the authorization-appropriation model must be restored, a biennial budget could help restore fiscal discipline. We present different approaches to the biennial budget providing insights for Congress to consider, accounting for the effects of annual appropriations and two-year authorizations on budget projections from agencies, economic growth rates projections and public debt. Overall, instituting a biennial budget process represents a key element for restoring Congress’ authority as a counterbalance to the Executive, but also creating more incentives for the two Branches to enhance their cooperation.
The annual battles over budgets, appropriations and threats of government shutdowns have become such a regular occurrence that the vast majority of those Members serving today have never actually seen the process work as designed by law. The last time all discretionary spending bills were enacted on time was in 1994 – over 20 years ago. The Speaker, Paul Ryan, was a 25-year-old junior staffer at the time.
In the last four decades, the budget process has been dominated by continuing resolutions and omnibuses. Since these kinds of legislation are only supposed to be used to prevent the government from running out of money at the start of the fiscal year, they clearly represent a deviation from the standard authorization-appropriation process as established by the 1974 Budget Act. The use of these practices has become so chronic that it is the accepted way of doing business. These deviations from the intended mechanisms of oversight and appropriations, however, have greatly reduced Congress’ role in the budget process and eroded its responsibility to conduct oversight of the Executive Branch. That is because the extended use of CRs and omnibuses over time increased the power of party leadership in each Chamber, at the expense of committee chairs, who became less involved in negotiations with the Executive Branch and who saw their roles diminished in the budget process. If the President can negotiate directly with the Speaker over one big omnibus appropriation bill, then why should he also negotiate with individual Appropriations Committee members? The Administration also does not have any incentive to cooperate with Congress, unless it passes authorizing legislation, which is the opportunity for authorizing committees to hold the Executive Branch accountable.
Setting aside the implications derived from the changes in the power structure within Congress, the practice of continuing resolutions and omnibuses also raise legitimate questions about whether the process used to pass such legislation is valid, especially when Congress has a limited time to debate, and almost no opportunity to amend, as an omnibus bill can appropriate more than a trillion dollars in spending. As a senior congressional staffer said in an interview, “CRs and omnibuses are not ideal but they are practical”. Practical or not, official data shows that in the last 18 fiscal years, Congress provided funding for the government through continuing resolutions covering an average of 5 months per fiscal year – almost half of every fiscal year. As the authorization-appropriation mechanism often does not function, and continuing resolutions covered almost half of a fiscal year, our Federal budget process has seemingly become an annual struggle to merely prevent government shutdowns rather than a substantive process designed to enact deliberate policy choices.
Additionally, these omnibus bills often include legislative provisions, known as policy riders, which typically constitute violations of the Standing Rules of the House and Senate that prohibit legislating on a general appropriation bill. Unfortunately, both Chambers have means by which they can dispense with the rule against legislating on an appropriation bill with the use of waivers. In the House, a waiver is a provision in the special rule resolution drafted by the Rules Committee for the consideration of a bill; it suspends a House rule, meaning Members cannot object if the legislation or some action the Chamber does violates the rule in question. These special resolutions only require a simple majority to pass the House, so it is easy to waive the rule. The Senate will waive its rules either through a specific provision in a unanimous consent agreement, or when 60 or more Senators vote to overrule a point of order that a Senator has raised.
Problems with Omnibuses And Continuing Resolutions (CRs)
A CRS report on “The Potential Impact on Agency Operations” of CRs mentions how Congress and the Executive negotiate the introduction of “anomalies” – provisions of law not allowed by the normal rules of legislating – to respond to what could be considered exceptional circumstances. For instance, a CR might remove a restriction on prohibiting an agency to start a new program or activity if the funds have not been appropriated in the previous fiscal year. These “anomalies” have been explained as necessary responses to urgent needs. However, if the authorizing process were conducted, carrying out the congressional oversight function, these gimmicks would not be needed. This would give a clear overview of each and every agency and program within a stand-alone authorization bill. In the absence of a reliable authorization process, Members will try to secure policy riders on omnibus appropriation bills, to achieve through the appropriations process, what it should have achieved through authorizing legislation.
According to Robert Keith, author of Congressional Research Service (CRS) Examples of Legislative Provisions in Annual Appropriations Acts, the appropriation bills should not establish nor alter government initiatives; otherwise the funds for the government will be held up by disputes over controversial issues not directly related to the appropriation bill in question. However, each year Members try to enact authorization policy via “legislative provisions”, also called “riders”. There are two types of riders. One actually creates a new program, policy, agency, or something similar. The other, a “limitation provision”, tries to rollback a policy already enacted by withholding funding for something. Provisions that change policy are prohibited under the rules of both Chambers of Congress; both Chambers routinely ignore those rules. Amendments that strike the funding for a program, as long as they have no conditions, are technically in order, though their last-minute inclusion on an omnibus bill is often meant to derail the process or force through a provision that should have been considered as part of an orderly appropriation process. Despite being forbidden or unwelcome, riders slip into law through procedural loopholes, or because a point of order is not sustained by the Chair or the Chamber overturns the Chair’s judgment on the point of order, or because the Chambers waive the rules prohibiting them. Whatever the explanation, these workarounds are symptomatic of a budget system that does not work the way it was designed to.
Consider how the impact of CRs on agencies has created a near-permanent state of uncertainty. Imagine the following scenario. An agency has to prepare its budget request, taking into account the mission, scope and the programs needed to implement their mandate. Usually, an agency assesses its budget priorities based on the previous year’s funding. For an agency to prepare a correct budget estimate before submitting it to the President, the Executive Branch’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) prepares guidelines and bulletins to support the agencies in the drafting of the budget phase. But since most agencies are operating under continuing resolutions at the time of year they are preparing their budget requests, they often have little certainty as to what their current budget actually is, or will be, by the time an omnibus appropriation bill passes – if it ever passes. Most of the guidance issued by OMB to the agencies concerns the risk of miscalculating the funds available under an interim CR due to the often-complex formulas and apportionment applied to CRs. This is no way to intelligently design a budget. Consider how many CRs and omnibuses have been used. According to CRS reporting, from the fiscal year 1986 to 2016, 390 regular appropriations have been “enacted or covered by full-year continuing resolutions”. Out of this number, 43.6 percent have been enacted in omnibus measures and 6.9 percent have been enacted in other forms, but mainly through full-year continuing appropriations. In short, over the last 30 years, more than half of all appropriations have been passed after the start of the fiscal year they were meant to cover.
The “fixes” Congress has come up with to deal with its structural inability to pass budgets on time, calls for certain reforms, which would naturally be considered by a bipartisan and bicameral Committee on Congressional Reform. Moving the start of the fiscal year to January 1 (see “Happy New Year: The Fiscal Year Should Start On January 1st”) and switching from annual budgets to a biennial one would be just two proposed measures for a comprehensive budget reform.
Biennial Budget Approaches And Definitions
The biennial budget approach is focused on passing a two-year budget plan at the beginning of each Congress. Building a budget for a two-year period would provide the time needed to once again pass the authorization bills before appropriating money from the Treasury.
When Congress passes an authorization bill, it is “giving the Executive Branch permission to spend money on specified items if that money is appropriated. Usually, the authorization process is where most congressional oversight of the various Executive agencies occurs. On the other hand, a budget appropriation is the actual spending of money by Congress, supposedly only on the programs approved by the authorizing committees”.[i] If the authorizing committees also pass multi-year bills, but the actual appropriation is kept on an annual basis, it can increase effectiveness and efficiency. Not only would the appropriators fund programs that have been previously authorized, as required by House and Senate rules, the appropriations process could start earlier in the second year, and could respond to emergencies or exigencies that arise between the passage of multi-year authorizations.
The concept of biennial budgeting is not a novelty. Different Presidents, such as Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, have supported it. In fact, the concept of the biennial budget was implemented at state level too. There are, however, different ways of interpreting the definition of the biennial budget. Although all advocates of the biennial budget agree on the idea of bienniums and congressional budgeting for two years, supporters differ on the sequencing of steps – i.e., whether appropriation or authorization would come first.
Some highly respected budget experts believe the appropriations bills should cover two years. G. William Hoagland, Senior Vice-President of the Bipartisan Policy Center advocates passing two-year appropriation bills in the first year of a Congress, and exclusively focus on authorizations in the second year. This approach is known as the stretch-sessions. He believes in the need for authorization to ensure that Federal programs will be run properly and accomplish the goals assigned by Congress. Besides, Congress could always pass emergency or other urgent appropriations should some special circumstance come up. “If you’re spending all your time appropriating and budgeting, you’re not able to free up members’ time and attention to deal with the underlying authorization and oversight process,” Hoagland said. “It’s good governance.”[ii] In fact, in 2010, Speaker John Boehner proposed this and other significant budget reforms to President Obama in exchange for raising the debt ceiling. That was among the many opportunities missed when those talks broke down.
There are different analyses showing the strengths and weaknesses of different biennial approaches. Some can be found in the CRS Report[iii] “Biennial Budgeting: Options, Issues, and Previous Congressional Action”. Supporters of the stretch-sessions say that the method increases time for Congress to authorize programs and agencies before it opens its purse to appropriate the funds. However, one drawback is related to budget projection. In an annual budget procedure, the time needed to project the revenues and expenditures and forecast is close to 18 months. In a biennial stretched approach the time will be 30 months. As economic projection is not an exact science, the differences between the economic projection and the actual economic performance could increase if the period used to project is longer. A ripple effect would be that future budgets and authorizations could rely on inexact data, which will result in incorrect assumptions and calculations which could create again the need to pass emergency resolutions just to avoid funding gaps, much less respond to an emergency situation such as sudden natural catastrophe[iv].
Another assumption that has been questioned about the stretch model is if the increased period of time for budgetary actions under this model would definitely lead to a decrease of missed deadlines of budgetary decisions.[v] In 1987, CBO expressed this uncertainty, also pointing out that the delays in the budget decisions were mainly related to the disagreements between the Executive and Legislative Branches, as well as between the House and the Senate.
This approach is being used in 19 states. An analysis [vi]of biennial budgeting at the state level showed some improvements in the budget process, though one has to be careful since biennial budgeting implemented at State level may result in an apples-to-oranges comparison. States Governors, for instance, have a wide authority over the budget that the President does not have. For instance, in Iowa, Indiana, South Carolina and South Dakota, governors can transfer funds among the agencies without going through the legislature. Moreover, out of all the states that still have a biennial budget, only North Dakota and Wyoming enact an actual two-year budget as envisioned above, where the remaining of the states enact separate budgets for two fiscal years at once.[vii] The two states will pass a budget over an entire two-year period – for instance, July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2019. The other 17 states actually pass two individual budgets within one budget resolution, for instance July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018 and July 1, 2018 to June 30, 2019. This makes it easier to modify the second year of the budget in an annual or emergency session, if economic assumptions change dramatically due to recession or emergency.
Of course, in the case of a governor’s unlimited authority over budgets, choosing an annual or a biennial budget cannot provide much guidance for the Federal budget process, where the Constitution exclusively reserves the origination of all appropriations and revenue bills to Congress. Table 1 shows all the states with annual and biennial budgets.
The case for a Federal biennial budget should not be considered only from the perspective offered to Congress to enhance its time management for budgeting. A biennial approach (with the authorization phase enacted in the first year of the biennium), could very well respond to two major challenges for Executive agencies: It will increase the certainty of their budget projections; and it would grant more time for Congress to request accountability, make changes, or even eliminate programs that do not work. In combination with changing the fiscal year to January 1, this approach would increase the Executive Branch’s accountability to Congress, as Government agencies would tend to be highly responsive to requests for congressional information if they knew their programs could be eliminated or curtailed in an authorization bill. Since under the two-year cycle, the passage of an authorization bill would become standard practice, not just a requirement that could easily be waived, the Administration would have to take the authorization and oversight process more seriously than it currently does – thus increasing Congress’ Article I authority over the Administration.
Put differently imagine a program under a certain agency sunsets (expires) in the next two years. (Another major budget reform would include sunset provisions for all discretionary spending programs.) To renew or continue the program, the Administration would have to come before the authorizing committee and justify its continuation. This is extremely important. If Congress ignores authorization bills and only passes appropriation bills, that occurrence shifts from itself to the President the de facto power to determine whether outdated programs survive, since by rule, Congress is not supposed to make policy changes on appropriation bills and the lack of authorization removes any formal accountability to Congress.
Another element to be considered is the biennial deadlock in annual authorization process caused by the two-year election cycle. Since there would be no need to wait for the President’s budget proposal, or for the passage of a budget resolution, the appropriators could start their process in January of the election year. This, and changing the fiscal year to a calendar year, avoids both a politically charged showdown the month before the election and the need to finish substantial business in a lame-duck session held after election, which allows retiring or defeated Members to make decisions without fearing voter backlash.
Finally, if the process is spread out and made more orderly, it allows for the possibility of better and more predictable coordination between the Congress and the President. Obviously, the two have to want to work together and, importantly, be willing to share credit in order for the even the most perfectly devised system to work. There is no utopia, and whatever budget reform is developed in the next few years, it will likely need revising again in a couple of decades. But the biennial approach can address many of the procedural and chronological problems with Congress’ ability to fully meet its obligations under the Constitution, and adequately review and conduct oversight over a nearly $4 trillion budget.
Bills Introducing Biennial Budgeting
The notion of the stretch-approach biennial budget has been under consideration for some time, and bills based on this notion have already been introduced in Congress. There have been several attempts in the past couple of Congresses. Rep. Ribble (R-WI) introduced H.R 1869[viii] in 2013. This Congress (the 114th), former Rep. Whitfield (R-KY), along with cosponsors Rep. Stivers (R-OH) and Rep. DeFazio (D-OR), introduced H.R. 1456[ix]. Once again this Congress, Rep. Ribble (R-WI) introduced a bill on biennial budgeting, H.R. 1610[x], which 237 members cosponsored – a strong bipartisan majority.
These bills have defined the term biennial as the period of two consecutive fiscal years beginning on October 1 of any odd-numbered year. However, besides defining the bienniums, each of these bills looked into the necessary changes for the budget process.
H.R. 1869 would have established biennial authorization and appropriations processes, basically setting the authorization and appropriation for two-year time frame.
In the case of H.R. 1456, the bill would amend “the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Congressional Budget Impoundment and Control Act of 1974, and the Rules of the House of Representatives to change the process for the President’s budget submission, Congressional budget resolutions, appropriations bills, and government strategic and performance plans from the current annual process to a biennial process, in which a biennium is the two consecutive fiscal years beginning on October 1 of any odd-numbered year”[xi]. The bill would require the Congressional Budget Office to submit “a quarterly analysis comparing revenues, spending, and the deficit or surplus for the current fiscal year, in addition to assumptions included in the congressional budget resolution”[xii]. It also stipulates, “The House Budget Committee must use the second session of each Congress to study issues with long-term budgetary and economic implications.” The bill would require “the biennial process to take effect beginning with the FY2020 budget process and sets forth procedures and requirements for a transition period during the 115th Congress”.[xiii]
H.R. 1610 would incorporate the provisions of H.R.1456, and add “a point of order in the House and Senate against authorizations of appropriations that do not include specific authorizations covering at least each fiscal year in one or more bienniums”.[xiv]
These bills have been introduced with bipartisan support – overwhelmingly so in the case of H.R.1610. However, they did not advance, and it is interesting to observe why. All of these bills call for amendments to the current governing laws and procedures. The necessity of these reforms cannot be denied, as the deficiencies of the existing legislative process are an impediment to the enactment of the annual 12 stand-alone bills and a barrier to Congress actually passing a budget resolution.
Why Not A “Stretch-Biennial Budget” Process?
If the main focus, however, is to restore the budget process on an authorization-appropriation mechanism, the definition of the biennial approach could be changed in these bills. If the authorization phase will be focused on a two-year basis and the appropriation left on an annual basis, there could be multiple positive effects. The first one would be that the calendar for the authorization would be extended and the authorizers could have more time to exercise their oversight function. Additionally, the rationale behind a two-year authorization is focused on the role of the existing agencies and their scope. There will always be a need to have authorization for the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice and so on. Stretching the period for authorizing those Departments and Agencies to a reasonable timeline that can respond to the changes occurring in their respective fields is an incentive to efficiency. In this case, the appropriation of funds without authorization would be eliminated. In fact, Congress might want to codify the requirement that non-authorized agencies may not receive appropriations by making the prohibiting such appropriations non-waivable. Moreover, those Agencies and Departments will have to be more accountable to Congress, as they will have to make their case and persuade Congress to fund their programs and operations. As noted above, proponents of a matching biennial appropriation cycle, would allow the House to work on authorizations one year and appropriations the next, thus ensuring the authorization process in not given short-shrift. Though a two-year authorization cycle, backed up with a prohibition on waiving the rules against appropriating money to unauthorized programs should be sufficient, in and of itself, to restore Legislative-Executive accountability.
A different approach is defining the biennial budget as a system starting with a two-year appropriation cycle, the stretch approach. The opposition to a two-year appropriation cycle is related to the risk of having to deal with overinflated budget proposals coming from the agencies, while the proponents of a two-year appropriations cycle, argue that Congress could always consider an emergency appropriation in the off-year. However, there are other significant problems a two-year appropriation cycle.
One issue is that this biennial approach also has the potential to increase Executive Branch mischief by using its Executive authority to spend money without it being directly appropriated, just as President Obama has done. The House of Representatives has sued the Obama Administration for just such an offense, spending money for provisions of the Patient Protection Act not specifically appropriated by the Congress. The case of House of Representatives v. Burwell is working its way, successfully so far, through the Federal court system. In the most recent ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Rosemary M. Collyer wrote: “Congress is the only source for such an appropriation, and no public money can be spent without one.” If the House wins any appeal that the Administration may bring, the Courts will have made themselves the guardians of the prerogatives assigned to the House by the Constitution. If not, biennial appropriations become a greater risk to the Congress’ power.
Another problem is that the beginning of the biennial budget will still have to rely on authorizations done in the previous year, which is to say, on the actions of the previous Congress. If we consider that the biennial budget will live long enough to survive at least one Congress, another consideration arises. Every second year of appropriation bill would be done in the absence of authorizations, unless Congress were to pass, and the President sign a three-year authorization bill for all discretionary agencies and departments in the year before the biennial budget goes into effect – a very unlikely scenario. For a graphical representation of the explanations presented, consider diagram 1.
In view of the present failings in the system, Congress would have to confront the risks of significant revenue uncertainties in the second year appropriation (and the third year of the authorization). If the economy does not meet projected rates of growth, then the Federal expenditures will have to be covered either through unbudgeted higher taxes or by increasing the national debt beyond the amount approved in the biennial budget. In short, this alternative offers a host of potential problems that would threaten to undermine the new process before the first biennial budget cycle was complete.
By contrast, the annual appropriation subsequent to a biennial authorization will reduce these risks, as the evaluations of economic performance will be made under the annual indicators. And appropriators can always reduce funding for marginal programs to help pay for urgent needs. Proponents of an annual appropriations process also argue that while authorizers look at the big picture and merits of large Federal programs, appropriators often need to react to unforeseen emergencies like floods, a cyberattack that brings down large sections of the electrical grid, terrorist attacks or even outbreaks of mosquito-borne illnesses.
While the benefits of a biennial budget and authorization process are pretty clear to even a significant majority of the current Congress, the issue of whether to maintain the annual appropriations process, or switch to a biennial appropriation process that alternates years with the budget resolution and the authorization process is something best determined by Congress creating a bicameral and bipartisan Joint Committee on Congressional Reform.
Over the last century, Congress has created three joint committees to reform Congress, and these panels have generated many ideas that have been crucial to improving how the Legislature operates. These joint committees were charged with examining all aspects of the legislative process, like House and Senate rules, staffing, the calendar, and, of course, the budget. A new joint committee would be given similar jurisdiction over the entire legislative process, and so it would be the natural place to examine budget reforms in a wider context. Members could see how the budget relates to issues such as law, the rules of the House and Senate, the legislative calendar and relations with the Executive Branch. Such a joint committee would give Members of Congress the opportunity to step back and reexamine the legislative process deliberately and conscientiously, not as Republicans or Democrats, but as equal members of one of the three branches of government. The political minority has no more interest in a weakened Congress than the political majority, which makes this Joint Committee process the ideal way to consider all aspects of reform. Legislation to create such a joint committee has already been introduced by Reps. Darin LaHood and Daniel Lipinski, both of Illinois. (Incidentally, both LaHood and Lipinski support the concept of a biennial budget.)
Under the proposed reform, with the agency being authorized for two years, the implementation of new programs, or even the expansion of an existing program, can be better guaranteed and accomplished in a more transparent and orderly way. At the same time an agency facing a two-year authorization that has an obsolete program must plead its case before the Congress in open hearings, or request that the program be changed or eliminated. Under the current practice, there are almost no programs eliminated, wasteful or otherwise, as the lack of an authorization process results in no clear oversight or requirements for the Administration to justify its programs before an authorization committee. As explained earlier, with the uncertainties brought by the regularized use of CRs and omnibuses, and the lack of genuine oversight through authorization hearings and bills, the ability to plan for the operations and programs of the Federal Government has become completely dysfunctional, which has weakened Congress’ constitutional responsibilities to hold the Executive Branch accountable for its use of the people’s tax dollars.
It is imperative for Congress to reform its budget process in order to respond to the challenges of a massive $4 trillion-a-year budget (along with a $19 trillion national debt), the not necessarily inaccurate public perception of its lack of efficiency and accountability, and its constitutional responsibilities that have steadily been encroached upon by the President. The broken budget system perpetuated for over four decades has led to regular disruptions that undermined government effectiveness at all levels by increasing uncertainties and creating ambiguities often ham-handedly addressed with legislative anomalies and other budgetary tricks.
The biennial approach maintains the two components of authorizations and appropriations, but changes the time frame to better ensure that both are implemented. As argued earlier, all budget reform must be considered in a comprehensive way that takes into account all aspects of the budget. No single measure can have a positive effect if it merely tinkers with procedural issues. The wide support that H.R.1610 should be considered a sign that Congress understands the need for reform and may be ready to finally begin a process that looks at all aspects of the way Congress does business. Amending the 1974 Budget Act and changing the House rules would be a step forward to introduce the biennial concept, which could actually increase the incentive for the Executive Branch to become more accountable in the process.
The best way to approach a comprehensive reform that includes changing the date of the fiscal year, enacting a biennial budget process, enforcing rules that require authorizations to be passed before appropriations can be spent, sun-setting discretionary budget programs, eliminating baseline budgeting and many other ideas requires the enactment of a bipartisan and bicameral Joint Committee on Congressional Reform. This should be one of the major accomplishments of the 115th Congress, because as creative as congressional minds can be, they are running out of blue smoke and mirrors as a substitute for a rational, orderly and logical way to manage the largest government budget on earth.
Mark Strand is the President of the Congressional Institute and Anca Butcaru is a research fellow. The Sausage Factory blog is a Congressional Institute project dedicated to explaining parliamentary procedure, Congressional politics, and other issues pertaining to the legislative branch.
[i] Strand M., Lang T., “ So what does national security have to do with the rules of the house of representatives”, April 2016, http://conginst.org/2016/04/26/so-what-does-national-security-have-to-do-with-the-rules-of-the-house-of-representatives/
[ii] Pianin, Eric, “End Beltway Brawls? Try Biennial Budgeting?”, The Fiscal Times, January 31st , 2014. http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/01/31/End-Beltway-Brawls-Try-Biennial-Budgeting
[iii] Tollestrup, Jessica, “Biennial Budgeting: Options, Issues, and Previous Congressional Action”, CRS report, February 2nd, 2015. https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41764.pdf
[iv] Young, Stuart, McLelland Drew, “Implementing Biennial Budget for the U.S. Congress”, Harvard Law School, Federal Budget Policy Seminar, Briefing Paper 20, June 6th, 2006.
[v] “Biennial Budgeting”, Staff Working Paper, The Congress of the United States, Congressional Budget Office, November 1987
[vi] Snell, K., Ronald, “State Experiences With Annual And Biennial Budgeting”, April 2011.
[viii]H.R.1869 – Biennial Budgeting and Enhanced Oversight Act of 2014, https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/1869
[ix] H.R.1456- Biennial Budgeting and Appropriations Act of 2015, https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1456
[x] H.R. 1610 – Biennial Budgeting and Enhanced Oversight Act of 2015, https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1610
[xi] H.R.1456- Biennial Budgeting and Appropriations Act of 2015, https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1456
[xiv] H.R. 1610 – Biennial Budgeting and Enhanced Oversight Act of 2015, https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1610