Abdullah Sameer

أَلَا يَعْلَمُ مَنْ خَلَقَ وَهُوَ اللَّطِيفُ الْخَبِيرُ Does He who created not know, while He is the Subtle, the Acquainted? (67:14)

The Eloquence and Beauty of the Quran

This post is based on a video by an Arab ex-muslim.  Video at end.

 

There are two major points of view as to why the Quran is amazing.  The first is its eloquence and beauty. The second and more modern claim is the scientific claims approach.  A lot of emphasis is put on him being illiterate, as if this means he couldn’t compose the Quran.  Knowledge and skills were passed on orally.

One of the challenges is that the Quran asks for a book to be produced like it.  The problem with this claim is it can’t be judged objectively.  Many works surpass the Quran in Arabic and other languages, but of course Muslims have a different opinion.  If it means that someone has to bring something EXACTLY like the Quran then this is impossible because every book contains a fingerprint of its author.  But then again nobody can bring something exactly like Plato, AlJahiz, AlTawhidy, Dante, or Shakespare, and of course this doesn’t mean they are from God.  Finally, most people can’t speak Arabic so they can’t take up the challenge or even confirm that it is eloquent. They have to take someone’s word for it.

Some places are eloquent, and some places are badly written and akward.  16:06 for example is clumsy and poorly written:

Whoever disbelieves in Allah after his belief… except for one who is forced [to renounce his religion] while his heart is secure in faith. But those who [willingly] open their breasts to disbelief, upon them is wrath from Allah , and for them is a great punishment;

Or this one which is incoherent and disjointed:

And [remember, O Muhammad], when We told you, “Indeed, your Lord has encompassed the people.” And We did not make the sight which We showed you except as a trial for the people, as was the accursed tree [mentioned] in the Qur’an. And We threaten them, but it increases them not except in great transgression. (17:60)

Or the bizarre jumping around of pronouns in Surah Yunus

It is He who enables you to travel on land and sea until, when you are in ships and they sail with them by a good wind and they rejoice therein, there comes a storm wind and the waves come upon them from everywhere and they assume that they are surrounded, supplicating Allah , sincere to Him in religion, “If You should save us from this, we will surely be among the thankful.” (10:22-23)

Or in Surah An’am

And it is He who sends down rain from the sky, and We produce thereby the growth of all things. We produce from it greenery from which We produce grains arranged in layers. And from the palm trees – of its emerging fruit are clusters hanging low. And [We produce] gardens of grapevines and olives and pomegranates, similar yet varied. Look at [each of] its fruit when it yields and [at] its ripening. Indeed in that are signs for a people who believe. (6:99)

If we wrote this, we would have been called ignorant.  But because its the Quran its hailed as glorious and the grammaticians created a special category called iltifat – sudden transition.

Next, look at this verse and tell me if you find it eloquent

And Mary the daughter of ‘Imran, who guarded her chastity; and We breathed into (her body) of Our spirit; and she testified to the truth of the words of her Lord and of His Revelations, and was one of the devout (servants). (66:12, Yusuf Ali translation)

That verse is described as Gabriel blowing into her private part through a hole in her garment.  Despite the Quran being hailed as a masterpiece of eloquence, the Arabs did not greet it as a masterpiece of eloquence. It took a long and violent struggle for them to win.  Khalid bin Walid and Amr bin Al Aas were from the last batch to convert only after they saw Islam was winning.  Not to mention Ikrimah and Abu Sufyan.  These guys did not believe Prophet Muhammad was truly a messenger of God but eventually they became Muslim after seeing the tide turn.

For example Ar-Razi, the brilliant mathematician and philosopher said:

You claim that the evidentiary miracle is present and available, namely, the Koran. You say: “Whoever denies it, let him produce a similar one.” Indeed, we shall produce a thousand similar, from the works of rhetoricians, eloquent speakers and valiant poets, which are more appropriately phrased and state the issues more succinctly. They convey the meaning better and their rhymed prose is in better meter. ,  By God what you say astonishes us! You are talking about a work which recounts ancient myths, and which at the same time is full of contradictions and does not contain any useful information or explanation. Then you say: “Produce something like it”?! (reference needed)

This post is based on the following video made by an ex-muslim:

Further reading:

The Quran And the Alexander Romance (Video)

This video goes into detail as to why Dhul Qarnayn described in the Quran is actually Alexander the Great.  It goes through multiple parallels of the two stories to demonstrate without a shadow of a doubt that the two people are one and the same.  Much has been written about this online already including how Alexander was given the name “The man with two horns”, but the actual details of the story are extremely closely related.

The Quran has many stories in it.  Infact one of the claims of its miraculous nature is that it contains many stories that Prophet Muhammad could not have known.  It is said that God himself told him these stories.

ذَٰلِكَ مِنْ أَنبَاءِ الْغَيْبِ نُوحِيهِ إِلَيْكَ ۚ وَمَا كُنتَ لَدَيْهِمْ إِذْ يُلْقُونَ أَقْلَامَهُمْ أَيُّهُمْ يَكْفُلُ مَرْيَمَ وَمَا كُنتَ لَدَيْهِمْ إِذْ يَخْتَصِمُونَ
That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal to you, [O Muhammad]. And you were not with them when they cast their pens as to which of them should be responsible for Mary. Nor were you with them when they disputed.  (Quran 3:44)
نَّحْنُ نَقُصُّ عَلَيْكَ نَبَأَهُم بِالْحَقِّ ۚ
It is We who relate to you, [O Muhammad], their story in truth…
وَكُلًّا نَّقُصُّ عَلَيْكَ مِنْ أَنبَاءِ الرُّسُلِ مَا نُثَبِّتُ بِهِ فُؤَادَكَ ۚ وَجَاءَكَ فِي هَٰذِهِ الْحَقُّ وَمَوْعِظَةٌ وَذِكْرَىٰ لِلْمُؤْمِنِينَ
And each [story] We relate to you from the news of the messengers is that by which We make firm your heart. And there has come to you, in this, the truth and an instruction and a reminder for the believers.

The first point is simply that the Quran mentions that they asked Prophet Muhammad about Dhul Qarnayn.  So we know this is an individual that was known to the questioners in Arabia.  This eliminates the possibility that Dhul Qarnayn is a completely foreign entity that nobody knows about.

Secondly, the two stories have very strong similarities including Alexander travelling to the east and west, seeing the rising of the sun from a people who had no cover from it, seeing the setting of the sun into a pool of water, etc.

Thirdly, why do Muslim scholars want to deny the similarity?  Because historical evidence has been found regarding Alexander the Great being a pagan idol worshipper, which means either the Quran is mistaken, or history is wrong, or the two people are not the same.  Since we have so much evidence that they are the same person, the only possibility is either history is completely wrong and fabricated (a conspiracy maybe?) or the Quran is actually the writing of Prophet Muhammad who included the popular fable of Alexander the Great in his “revelation”.

Jihad, the Arab Conquests and the Position of Non-Muslim Subjects

Summary:

– The harsh criticism of Islam towards other faiths, how some of the Jews were cursed for what they said, how they were turned into monkeys and pigs.
– How you shouldn’t take the Christians and Jews as friends
– The Jews accused of perverting their books (of course it must be so because otherwise the Quran cannot be true)
– Proof that Jihad is a holy battle and not just a spiritual internal battle
– How to deal with prisoners of war
– How its a grave sin to run away from a battle (cuz Allah hates those who run from the battles)
 
– How when Islam was weak, the Quran had a completely soft tone of voice towards the non-Muslims, and how after the hijrah the Quran completely changes its tone and becomes more hostile towards the kuffar.
 
– The eviction of all of the christians, jews and polytheists from the Arabian peninsula ordered by Prophet Muhammad
 
– The theory that the Arabs were actually warriors by nature and that this has nothing to do with Islam, some analysis about some of the famous warriors of Islam such as Khalid b. Walid, Amr bin Al-Aas (who all converted when they saw that Islam was winning and it was in their best interests…)
 
– Also, the treatment of early conquering Muslims (wholesale slaughter of peoples) such as the invasion of Syria by Abu Bakr, the conquest of Egypt by Amr bin Al-aas, and near the end of the article it discusses the discriminatory practices of Islamic law towards non-Muslim subjects (jizya, inability to hold public office)

The ins and outs of being Muslim and ex-Muslim by Jennine

It wasn’t shoddy ‘scientific miracles’ like the moon splitting in half or jinng stories that made me finally throw in the towel when I was a teenager. It was the hypocrisy of people I was taught to look up to and being unable to reconcile my humanitarianism and my sense of justice with Islam.

Islam’s attitudes towards and stances on women’s rights, sexuality, LGBTQ, the individual, and life itself in almost every aspect do not mesh with how I understand the world today.

I learned many great values growing up Muslim. I developed a strong sense of empathy and charitableness. But I did not, and do not, need religion to be compassionate.

I hate the notion that anyone who isn’t a Muslim or a person ‘of the Book’ will be damned to a hell we don’t even know exists, or needs to go through Mario Kart-level jumps and loopholes to avoid it.

I mean, yeah, we’re encouraged to invite the non-Muslim neighbours over for dinner and sing kumbaya here on Earth together, but if everyone is going to be separated into a Hell and a Heaven in the Hereafter anyway, what’s the point? It’s an illusion.

I hate that as a young girl growing up, I had to stand behind the men and boys to pray with the women — if we weren’t already segregated— because we were taught our figures were objects of desire we had to fiercely guard (from the men supposed to protect us), even while we were meant to be prostrating in worship. I still find it difficult to deal with the shame that has cloaked my body for years — until this day.

I also hate that I was taught that my future husband had to be Muslim, whereas Muslim men are able to marry non-Muslim women. For years, I floundered, finally accepting Tribe ruled over Love, as it was Written.

I hate that in Islamic law, a woman’s inheritance from her father should be half the amount of her brother’s, and that her testimony in court is worth half a man’s, because women are unreliable witnesses.

I was told Islam viewed us all equally, but it did not seem or feel very equal.

I also stopped caring about rules that were made for the sake of rule-making, drawing lines in the sand, or guarding the male ego, because most of it was and is illogical to me.

I was over lengthy lectures discussing whether music is allowable or forbidden, and what instruments are allowed, and I was through with concepts of haram and halal dictating my life, and being told what I could or could not wear and that my afterlife depended on it.

And I wondered, every day, how god could be so hung-up over his creations not covering up their hair or missing prayers?

Everything is structured. Formulaic. Crafted. Admittedly, religion helps to give a person a sense of purpose, hopefulness, security and stability. But the promise of a higher purpose stopped being alluring when I began to question almost all of it. I started to feel like a child with very little freedom; following rules by the carrot and stick.

Times have changed. And some people are able to negotiate changing times with their faith, or overlook parts of the religion and pick and choose or gloss over the ugly stuff, but I can’t. I’d rather not stress myself out by stretching and reaching with wild mental gymnastics and rationalising and convincing myself that I can sincerely work around it.

I have treaded carefully for a long time, cautious not to ruin the visage of this liberal, cultural Muslim I harvested, but also careful not to invest too much of myself into all of it. I used to believe deeply, but when I stopped, I never pretended to pray or fast, like some people I know do.

I’ve been to the mosque a handful of times wilfully as an adult, simply to appreciate beautiful architecture. I’d go along to events, or fundraisers with my practicing Muslim friends out of some strange sense of obligation and duty I had manufactured, enjoying their company, yet still quietly feeling very out of place.

I’m fortunate to live in a secular society, where I have at least been able to perfect the liberal Muslim performance, and be silently dismissed as a lazy worshipper still finding her way.

I didn’t have to share any of this — I do not want to open myself up to any patronisation or pity prayers or hatred. I’m not interested in anybody making me his or her missionary project. But the reason I am writing this — saying this — is to shed this burden of representation that keeps smothering me.

When you identify as Muslim, you are expected to represent the global Muslim community. It’s your family, your brotherhood, your sisterhood, and you should not dishonour it. You should not step out of line. Particularly now, at a time when there is rampant, growing Islamophobia towards Muslims in response to terrorist acts carried out by other Muslims. Your words must uphold a particular social and political edge. Resisting Islamophobia becomes your edict, usually at the expense of addressing both internal and broader issues that you care just as or more strongly about.

Even among seemingly progressive Muslims, there are concerning apologist attitudes. For some, protecting the name of the Muslim community is paramount, even if it means paying a bit of lip service to issues surrounding women, homosexuality, or sectarianism. But that’s where it ends.

It’s not fair or logical for anyone to carry that kind of burden. When a Muslim commits a terrorist attack, they don’t represent all Muslims. By that token, no Muslim represents all Muslims. Faux, real, extreme, liberal, ex, or otherwise. But that’s not the reality. People are programmed to generalise and pigeonhole and we like figuring out who is with us and who is against us. And Islam dictates that Muslims are one unit.

Which is why I’m putting it on the record that I am formerly Muslim. Of the ex variety. Because it’s doubly harder as a journalist, and as someone engaging in public discourse, to keep pretending. Muslims may expect me to represent them, in all contexts and under all circumstances. But that’s not my burden.

Because I’m out.