<![CDATA[This study critically examines the methodological frameworks used to determine Makkiyyah and Madaniyyah verse classifications in Quranic studies and analyzes their impact on the consistency of digital Quran applications. Using a qualitative approach with analytical-comparative library research, this study draws directly on al-Qattan Mabahis fi Ulum al-Quran as its primary source, while the methodological perspectives of al-Zarkasyi Al-Burhan fi Ulum al-Quran and al-Suyuti's Al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Quran are incorporated through contemporary secondary literature that engages both works comparatively, alongside a purposive sample of digital Quran applications including Quran Kemenag, Quran.com, and MyQuran. Four competing theoretical frameworks (historical, geographical, subjective, and content-based) produce irreconcilable results for 12 disputed (khilafiyyah) surahs. Comparative data across platforms demonstrate that inconsistent source references cause divergent labelling of the same surahs, with Quran.com following international scholarly consensus while Indonesian applications adhere to the national Mushaf Standard. Critically, no application discloses the methodological basis of its classification or acknowledges scholarly disagreement (ikhtilaf), reducing complex ijtihad into binary data that risks misleading users in contextual Quranic interpretation, particularly in analyzing nasikh wa al-mansukh.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
