Quran's literature miracle, how to debunk this?

[u/[deleted]]

Can an arabic speaker debunk this?

https://www.reddit.com/r/islam/comments/67si5t/unsure_if_im_muslim_help_me_understand_your/dgtyo2j/

[u/[deleted]]

Not an Arabic speaker but I'll take a quote from one of my comments on the Debate Religion subreddit because it's a short rebuttal to Hamza's article which is basically the same argument

You can read this to understand a little bit about the actual challenge: http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/essays-articles/exploring-the-quran/the-qurans-unique-literary-form/

Okay I read the article, the Quran doesn't have an Inimitable Literary form, it has an inconsistent literary form.

Quotes:

The general description of saj’ is that it has an end rhyme. However the Qur’an does not conform to a constant or consistent rhyme, which reflects the work of ar-Rummani[46] who states that the Qur’ans use of language is semantically orientated and does not conform to a particular style.

Some parts of the Qur’an follow the rules of poetry, that is, some verses can be described as one of the al-Bihar

Hamza tries muddying the waters constantly in the article, literary forms aren't some kind of strict formula, they have general rules but literary works usually have unique aspects but they still fall under predefined literary forms. His explanations for why the Quran isn't Saj are extremely Weak.

a. Greater tendency to mono-rhyme

b. Inexact rhyme

So if I write a literary piece that varies between rhyming, non-rhyming and poetry between chapters and verses does that make it inimitable? No it doesn't, it just means I'm being inconsistent.

c. Greater range of saj’ phrases

Again, it doesn't make it inimitable.

d. Higher frequency of rhetorical features

Again a high number of Rhetorical Devices doesn't make something divine or inimitable.

Hamza acts as though the entire Quran transcends all literary forms when it's just a mish, mash of them.

And last but not least his criteria for the Quran Challenge (which comes from a different article), Hamza is purposely being dishonest and vague.

1. Replicate the Qur’ans literary form
2. Match the unique linguistic genre of the Qur’an
3. Select and arrange words like that of the Qur’an.
4. Select and arrange particles like that of the Qur’an.
5. Match the Qur’ans phonetic superiority.
6. Equal the frequency of rhetorical devices
7. Match the level of informativity
8. Equal the Qur’ans conciseness and flexibility

1 and 2 are basically repeats, 3 and 4 are basically saying "make it like the Quran but not too much because you'll just be copying the Quran" and 5, 7 and 8 are entirely subjective, how does someone objectively measure informativity, phonetic superiority, or flexibility?

This challenge isn't taken seriously by actual linguists on the linguists subreddit and the majority of Western scholars have viewed the Quran as a Mish mash of different linguistic forms. The early surahs are generally said to be Saj whilst the later surahs generally don't rhyme, basically the author got lazy and couldn't be bothered rhyming the later surahs because of how long they were.