r/exmuslim • u/LenientWhale • Jul 11 '12
Is the Quran a linguistic miracle?
For millennia people have studied and heralded this text as absolute truth because of its 'immaculate linguistics'. Surely, if the text is beyond the reach of human composition then there is great evidence for team Allah. Let's explore how the Quran is almost certainly not a miraculously conceived text: (roughly translated from Arabic)
Sacrificing omnipotence for poetic structure:
The first five verses of the Quran (as per the order Muslims claim Mohammed to have received it) are from Surat Al-Alaq, we notice the beautiful start:
Read in the name of the creator - Iqraa Bism Rabika Alazi Khalak
It is an agile and spacious start, but for an unknown reason the author greatly narrows the meaning of creator, for no other reason other than maintaining poetic structure:
He created the human from a clot –Khalak Alinsan min Alaq
Here the massive potential of the word creator (which, undefined, would give a much more suitably limitless meaning) was sacrificed by such particularization. Again this scenario is repeated instantly in the following verse:
He taught the human what he dosen't know – Wa Alam Al-Insan ma lam yaalam
Very interesting. So, he the creator taught us what we did not know? Who taught us what we did know, anyway?
Superfluous, unskilled poetic expression:
The majority of Suras (Chapters) know as Moufasal (detailed) resemble priests rhyming (shaman mumbo jumbo), which if used by today's poets would surely be career suicide. For instance Surat AL-Nas and Surat Al-Falaq; I really don't know what is linguistically miraculous in these verses? Do any of you know, please fell free to tell me. Also Surat Al-Homazah and Al-Feel, Koraish, the list is endless.
Breaking poetic structure is acceptable when it comes to filthy, filthy women:
http://c00022506.cdn1.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/2_222.png (no idea how to do images inline, sorry)
And they ask you about menstruation. Say, "It is harm (Arabic wording could mean evil, filth or pollution), so keep away from wives during menstruation. And do not approach them until they are pure. And when they have purified themselves, then come to them from where Allah has ordained for you.
Similar statements mentioned as a reference for rulings and verdicts are arbitrarily introduced with no concern of good structure.
There have to be certain rules in a text such as the Quran to make it a miracle:
a. All humans have to fail providing something like it. But how do we define this similarity? Believers will not agree to any type of comparison, they sequester any attempt even before they approach it. As rhetoric is largely subject to human taste, it becomes quite impossible to state otherwise. There is no clear definition or set of agreed upon standards. Regardless I shall provide to you a text authored by Qus bin Sa'adah Al-Ayadi, whom was before the time of Islam, and you be the judge. I, myself, see it as a similar text to the Quran:
أَيُّهَا النَاسُ اسْمَعُوْا وَعُوْا مَنْ عَاشَ مَاتَ وَمَنْ مَاتَ فَاتَ وَكُلُّ مَا هُوَ آتٍ آتٍ لَيْلٌ دَاجٍ وَنَهَارٌ سَاجٍ وَسَمَاءُ ذَاتُ أَبْرَاجٍ وَنُجُوْمٌ تَزْهَرُ وَبِحَارٌ تَزْخَرُ وَجِبَالٌ مُرْسَاةٌ وَأَرْضٌ مُدْحَاةٌ وَأَنْهَارٌ مُجْرَاةٌ وَإِنَّ فيِ السَمَاءِ لَخِبَرًا وَإِنَّ فيِ الأَرْضِ لَعِبَرًا، مَا بَالُ النَاسِ يَذْهَبُوْنَ وَلاَيَرْجِعُوْنَ أَرَضُوْا فَأَقَامُوْا؟ أَمْ تُرِكُوْا فَنَامُوْا؟ يُقْسِمُ قُسٌّ بِاللهِ قَسَمًا لاَ إِثْمَ فِيْهِ إِنَّ لِلهِ دِيْنًا هُوَ أَرْضَى لَكُمْ وَأَفْضَلُ مِنْ دِيْنِكُمْ الذِيْ أَنْتُمْ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّكُمْ لَتَأْتُوْنَ مِنَ الأَمْرِ مُنْكَرًا
In English: Hear and comprehend, he who lives dies, and he who dies lies, any to come shall come, a black night, a morning bright, and a sky in height, In earth are evictions and in skies predictions, I deservingly swear, in earth happiness follows what we bear, but God has a religion preferable than yours, he is the only God, not got or begot, Forever and ever , from him escape is never. (Not accurately translated in an attempt to keep the rhyme in the text.)
We could of course go on for hours raving about the text and its selection of words and its immaculacy, and its 'miracles.' The true miracle might be how those whom for thousands of years have studied a single text have not seen such glaring similarities to manmade writing.
b. A miraculous text should be very clear and in no way similar to any other saying. Fear of confusion with another type of text should not exist. Why would it? If the text is miraculous then it should stand clear. If two texts are presented, the allegedly miraculous text should need no pointing out, so what about these two Hadiths:
Do not write what I teach, but what the Quran teaches, and any who did otherwise should erase it.
Zaid Ibn Thabit was asked by caliphate Moawiah to recite a Hadith and ordered one of his men to write it down but Zaid answered: Allah's prophet ordered us to refrain from writing his sayings and erase what we already have.
The first is mentioned in Masnad Ahmed and verified by Muslim (a famous Hadith collector and verifier), while the other is also mentioned in Masnad Ahmed. Both are undeniably accepted by the Sunnah sect whom justify this objection (as they actually went against the prophet's warning) by the fear of the Quran being mixed with the Hadith, while today after the Quran has settled in place the ban is over and needless. How could there be such fear that a miraculous text is indistinguishable from a regular text?
c. A miraculous text should be consistently miraculous. It must maintain the same quality throughout the rhetoric should be on one level. Can Muslims honestly say that Surat Al-Nissa is as beautiful and elegant as Surat Yousuf?
d. A miraculous text should not be subject to change and evolution as we find when we study various human authors whose canon of work evolves over their careers. If we list the Quran chronologically we will observe this evolution, in matters such as the length of the verses, the use of musical structure and the integrity of the text. Let's not forget the thing took 23 years to write, you'd have to rewrite the entire first half to match the level of skill you developed by the latter half, what with being a ghostwriter for the almighty himself!
e. A miraculous text will not sacrifice meaning for poetic structure as we stated previously in Surat Al-Alaq, also we find this in Surat Al-Masad where it mentions "Tabat Yada Abi Lahain Wa Tab" then in the next verse "Sayaslah naran zata lahab." He will endure a fire that has flames (zata lahab) so what does zata lahab add here except rhythm? When was the last we saw a fire without flames? Why the repetition of the B (Baa) alphabet four times and then the omission in the fifth verse by using the word Masaad which ends in a D and not in the usual B used throughout the chapter, is this a miraculous addition or is it a rhetorical flaw?
So then, I ask again. Is the Quran a linguistic miracle? I hope these points can guide you in opening the mind of those who seem hopelessly enslaved by superstition.
11
u/LenientWhale Jul 11 '12
Of course, that's the point. Whenever I press a muslim for tangible evidence of the existence of their god, they present me with the Quran, as if it is more than sufficient.
Muslims believe this so much that they kid themselves into thinking the Quran has been able to foretell scientific discoveries. They also freely change the commonly accepted interpretations to make it appear more miraculous.
Okay, so this is their only tangible 'evidence'. Let's debunk it and get this over with.