Dan’s Course on Islam
The Qur’an... an incoherent rhapsody of
Yüklə 7,46 Mb.
|
The Qur’an... an incoherent rhapsody of Fable and Precept Edward Gibbon, in the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, says: “(The Koran is an) incoherent rhapsody of fable and precept and declamation which seldom excites a sentiment or an idea, whcih sometimes crawls in the dust and is sometimes lost in the clouds... The use of fraud and perfidy, of cruelty and injustice, were often subservient to the propagation of the faith... Muhammad commanded or approved the assassination of Jews and idolaters... Muhammad indulged the appetites of a man and abused the claims of a prophet. A specail revelation dispensed him from the laws which he had imposed upon his nation. The female sex, without reserve, was abandoned to his desires.” Muhammad’s claim that he was the Apostle of God was “a necessary fiction”. The use of fraud and perfidy, of cruelty and injustice, were often subservient to the propagation of the faith; and Muhammad commanded or approved the assassination of the Jews and idolaters who had escaped from the field of battle. By the repetetion of such acts the character of Muhammad must have been gradually stained... In his private conduct Muhammad indulged the appeties of a man, and abused the claims of a prophet. A special revealtion dispensed him from the laws which he had imposed on his nation; the female sex, without reserve, was abandoned to his desires.” (Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Vol 5, pp. 240ff.) İbn Warraq, Why I’m Not a Muslim, p. 10. The Qur’an... a Wild and Absurd Performance David Hume: in Enquiries Concerning the Human Understanding and Concerning the Principles of Morals, (p. 450) wrote: (The Koran is a) wild and absurd performance. Let us attend to his (Muhammad’s) narration; and we shall soon find that he bestows praise on such instances of treachery, inhumanity, cruelty, revenge, and bigotry as are utterly incompatible with civilized society. No steady rule of right seems there to be attended to; and every action is blamed or praised, so far only as is beneficial or hurtful to the true believers.” Hume also refers to Muhammad as the “pretend prophet.” It should be clear to everyone by now that the notion of the Koran being Muhammad’s performance and his narration is totally blasphemous. The Qur’an... A wearisome jumble, crude, incondite Thomas Carlyle, in Sartor Resartus: On Heroes and Hero Worship, described the Koran as: “A wearisome jumble, crude, incondite (with) endless interactions (and) longwindedness... Nothing but a sense of duty could carry any European through the Koran.” Philospoher David Hume, in his An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, commented: No Questioning the Qur’an A good Muslim is taught to never question the Qur’an; it is the absolute word of God and cannot be questioned, for Allah will punish every disobedient, prideful individual. Dr. Abraham Sarker, Understand My Musim People, p. 10. The Qur’an Gives no Certainty about one’s Fate 9:18..... 17:57..... 26:52..... 26:82..... 28:67..... 66:8..... Dr. William Campbell, The Qur’an and the Bible, p. 297. Muhammad & Qur’an... the Most Stubborn Enemies of Civilization Sir William Muir: “The sword of Mahomet (Muhammad) and the Coran (Koran) are the most stubborn enemies of civilization, liberty, and truth that the world has yet known.” (Don Richardson, Secrets of the Koran, p. 252. 33.6 Negative Quotes About Violence Proverb About Arab Aggressivness “I and my brothers against my cousin, I an my cousins against the stranger (ie. the world) ” Stuart Robinson, Mosques & Miracles, p. 113. Terror that is more powerful than religion Blaise Pascal: The conduct of God, who disposes all things kindly, is to put religion into the mind by reason, and into the heart by grace. But to will to put it into the mind and heart by force and threats is not to put religion there, but terror. “terrorem poitus quam religionem” = terror that is more powerful than religion. Dr. John Ankerberg, Fast Facts on Islam, p. 78. STOP B-33 Allah’s Thought at All Times Forced Conversions of Christians İbn Warraq: “Islamic History is full of references to the forced conversion of Christians, (Jews, mentioned earlier) Zoroastirans and pagans.” Ibn Warraq, Why I’m Not a Muslim, p. 231. Islam... nothing but a trail of blood and tears Atay Hoca: In 1995 while I was a doctoral student in Islamic Theology at Ankara University, Prof. Dr. Hüseyin Atay, the department head of Islamic Theology one day honestly stated in class: “Where ever you find the history of Islam, you find nothing but a trail of blood and tears. Sometimes I think that there is no other truth to be found other than that which is to be found within Christianity.” (Daniel Wickwire) Islam... riddled with violence, fratricide, and wars of aggression SecularIslam.org: One group of secular Muslims point out, from the seventh to the fourteenth centuries, Islam “is riddled with violence, fratricide, and wars of aggression.” Dr. John Ankerberg, Fast Facts on Islam, p. 72. Islamic militancy: the single greatest threat to Western security Willy Claes: NATO secretary general declared that since the end of the Cold War, “Islamic militancy has emerged as perhaps the single gravest threat to NATO alliance and to Western security.” Indeed, Claes said, not only did militant Islam pose the same kind of threat to the West as communism before it, but the scale of the danger was greater, for militant Islam encompassed elements of “terrorism, religious fanaticism, and the exploitation of social and economic injustice.” Dr. Daniel Pipes, Militant Islam Reaches America, p. 245. Islamism is totalitarian, utopian, violent Ottawa Citizen: “A Muslim is one who practices Islam, a great religion. An Islamist is one for whom Islam is not just a religion, but political ideology. Islamists seek to establish pure Islamic societies governed according to the harshest interpretation of Islam. Islamism has apocalyptic echos of another millennial, ideology, fascism (think of the Thousand Year Reich). Islamism is totalitarian, utopian, violent – and like fascism it is expansionist. (“Jihad in Canada,” Ottawa Citizen, June 5, 2006; cf. Robert Spencer, The Truth About Muhammad, p. 7). Pakistan’s President In February 2002 President Musharraf of Pakistan in an international radio broadcast stated that ‘while Muslim nations were involved in fratricical conflicts, they were the poorest, most illiterate, most backward, most unhealthy, most unenlightened, most deprived and the weakest of all the human race.’15 15. www.news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia, February 16, 2002. Stuart Robinson, Mosques & Miracles, p. 111. “I Love to Kill You” Ali İbn Abi Talib encountered a man called Umru and told him, “I indeed invite you to Islam.” Umru said, “I do not need that.” Ali said, “Then I call you to fight.” Umru answered him, “What for my nephew? By God, I do not like to kill you.” Ali said, “But by God, I love to kill you.”
Ever since the religion of Islam appeared in the world, the espousers of it...have been as wolves and tigers to all other nations, rending and tearing all that fell into their merciless paws, and grinding them with their iron teeth; that numberless cities are raised from the foundation, and only their name remaining; that many countries, which were once as the garden of God, are now a desolate wilderness; and that so many once numerous and powerful nations are vanished from the earth! Such was, and is at this day, the rage, the fury, the revenge, of these destroyers of human kind. Google removes popular negative searches related to Islam (but not other religions) (imgur.com) submitted 1 month ago by Jade8674 * 274 comments http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/alfyk/google_removes_popular_negative_searches_related/ 34.* Qur’an* (Koran*, Kor’an*, Quran*) 34.1 The Chronologial Order of the Suras No. Name Order Time 1. Fatiha 5 Mecca-1 2. Bakara 87 Medina-4 3. Ali-Imran 89 Medina-5 4. Nisâ 92 Medina-6 5. Mâ’ide 112 Medina-6 6. An’âm 55 Mecca-3 7. A’râf 39 Mecca-3 8. Anfâl 88 Medina-4 9. Tauba 113 Medina-7 10. Yûnus 51 Mecca-3 11. Hûd 52 Mecca-3 12. Yûsuf 53 Mecca-3 13. R’ad 96 Mecca-3 14. İbrahim 72 Mecca-3 15. Hijr 54 Mecca-3 16. Nahl 70 Mecca-3 17. Isrâ 50 Mecca-1 18. Kahf 69 Mecca-1 19. Maryam 44 Mecca-1 20. Tâ-hâ 45 Mecca-1 21. Anbiya 73 Mecca-1 22. Hajj 103 Mecca-3 23. Mü’minûn 74 Mecca-3 24. Nûr 102 Medina-6 25. Furqân 42 Mecca-3 26. Shu’arâ 47 Mecca-3 27. Naml 48 Mecca-3 28. Qasas 49 Mecca-3 29. Ankabut 85 Mecca-2 30. Rum 84 Mecca-2 31. Lukmân 57 Mecca-2 32. Sajda 75 Mecca-2 33. Ahzab 90 Medina-6 34. Saba’ 58 Mecca-2 35. Fâtır 43 Mecca-2 36. Yâ-Sin 41 Mecca-2 37. Saaffat 56 Mecca-2 38. Sâd 38 Mecca-2 Wickwire, Has the Bible Been Changed? p. 15 No. Name Order Time 39. Zumar 59 Mecca-2 40. Mü’min 60 Mecca-2 41. Fussilat 61 Mecca-2 42. Shûrâ 62 Mecca-2 43. Zukhruf 63 Mecca-2 44. Dukhân 64 Mecca-2 45. Jâthiya 65 Mecca-2 46. Ahqâf 66 Mecca-2 47. Muhammad 95 Medina-4 48. Fath 111 Medina-6 49. Hujurât 106 Medina-7 50 Qâf 3 Mecca-1 51. Dhâriyat 67 Mecca-1 52. Tûr 76 Mecca-1 53. Najm 23 Mecca-1 54. Qamar 37 Mecca-1 55. Rahmân 97 Mecca-1 56. Wâqi’a 46 Mecca-1 57. Hadîd 94 Medina-6 58. Mujâdala 105 Medina-5 59. Hashr 101 Medina-5 60. Mumtahına 91 Medina-6 61. Saff 109 Medina-4 62. Jumu’a 110 Medina-4 63. Munâfiqûn 104 Medina-6 64. Taghâbun 108 Medina-4 65. Talâq 99 Medina-6 66. Tahrîm 107 Medina-7 67. Mulk 77 Mecca-1 68. Qalam 2 Mecca-1 69. Hâqqa 78 Mecca-1 70. Maârij 79 Mecca-1 71. Nûh 71 Mecca-1 72. Jinn 40 Mecca-1 73. Muzzammil 3 Mecca-1 74. Muddaththir 4 Mecca-1 75. Qıyâmah 31 Mecca-1 76. Insân 98 Mecca-1 No. Name Order Time 77. Mursalat 33 Mecca-1 78. Naba 80 Mecca-1 79. Nâziât 81 Mecca-1 80. Abasa 24 Mecca-1 81. Takvir 7 Mecca-1 82. Infitâr 82 Mecca-1 83. Mutaffifîn 86 Mecca-1 84. Inshiqaq 83 Mecca-1 85. Burûj 27 Mecca-1 86. Târiq 36 Mecca-1 87. A’lâ 8 Mecca-1 88. Ghashiya 68 Mecca-1 89. Fajr 10 Mecca-1 90. Balad 35 Mecca-1 91. Shams 26 Mecca-1 92. Lail 9 Mecca-1 93. Duhâ 11 Mecca-1 94. Inshirah 12 Mecca-1 95. Tîn 28 Mecca-1 96. Alâq 1 Mecca-1 97. Qadr 25 Mecca-1 98. Bayyina 100 Mecca-1 99. Zilzâl 93 Mecca-1 100. Âdiyât 14 Mecca-1 101. Qâri’â 30 Mecca-1 102. Takâthur 16 Mecca-1 103. Asr 13 Mecca-1 104. Humaza 32 Mecca-1 105. Fil 19 Mecca-1 106. Quraish 29 Mecca-1 107. Mâ’ûn 17 Mecca-1 108. Kauthar 15 Mecca-1 109. Kâfirûn 18 Mecca-1 110. Nasr 114 Medina-7 111. Lahab 6 Mecca-1 112. İkhlâs 22 Mecca-1 113. Falâq 20 Mecca-1 114. Nâs 21 Mecca-1 (Kesikoğlu, pp. 124-125) 34.2 The Meccan and Medina Periods 1st Meccan Period: 611-615 1,51-53, 55-56, 68-70, 73-75, 77-97, 99-104, 111-114 writings of judgement and revelation concerning the nature of Allah and his rule. 2nd Meccan Period: 616-622 6-7, 10-21, 23, 25-32, 34-46, 50, 54, 67, 71-72, 76 Longer surahs dealing with doctrines mainly from the Pentateuch. Islam is declared to be the exclusive true religion. Medina Period: 623-632 2-5, 8-9, 22-24, 33, 37, 47-49, 57-59, 60-66, 98, 110 Last 10 years of Muhammad’s life deal predominately with government and ethics. STOP C-12 Wickwire, Has the Bible Been Changed?, p. 15. 34.3 Othman’s “Very Special and Unique Precautions” with the Text of the Qur’an When they (the committee) had copied sheets into volumes, Othman restored the sheets to Hafsa. And he sent to every region a volume from what they had copied, and commanded, regarding everything of the Qur’an besides it, in every sheet and volume, that it should be burned.8 Othman decided to make sure that there were no variaitons in the Qur’an. To do this he burned all the copies, except the one made by Zaid İbn Thabit’s committee.
If Othman had not ordered all the other copies of the Qur’an to be burned, there would be four (or more) separate testimonies to its validity. He burned Qur’ans which were the primary collections, made by eye-witnesses and ear-witnesses of what Muhammad said. The Torah says that there must be at least two witnesses (Deut. 19:15), but Othman destroyed the plurality of witnesses and turned them into one. At least one Hadith says, “He found the Qur’ans many and left one; he tore up the Book.”10 In all seriousness I now ask my Muslim readers. On what basis can you prove to yourselves, let alone to non-Muslims, that there was “no changing of the text” (al-tahrif al-lafzı)... What is to be said about Othman and his committee, and Marwan? Did they not manhandle, alter and do as they pleased with the Qur’an?... How do you know that there have been no changes in the Qur’an in the 163 years between the giving of the first verse of the Qur’an and the oldest known copy? What about the variants? How do you know that it is just the way it came from Muhammad? 8. Tabari’s Commentary, I, 20. 9. Ibn Abi Dawud, (Died 316 AH / 928AD) Kitab al-Maşahif, hand copied by Arthur Jeffery from a hand-written copy in the Zahiriya Library at Damascus (Hadith, No. 407), p. 25, reproduced in Materials for the History of the Text of the Qur’an, Arthur Jeffery, E.J. Brill, Leiden, 1937. 10. Tabari, I, 2952, 10İ II 516, 5. Dr. William Campbell, The Qur’an and the Bible, pp. 118, 121 & 128. 34.4 Burned Copies Bukhari 6, p. 479.....Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur’anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies be burnt. 34.5 The Fate of the Unique First Copy of the Qur’an Finally we must mention the destruction of the unique first copy of the Qur’an collected at the order of Abu Bakr, which because of his oath, Othman had returned to Hafsa. After Othman’s death, Marwan the Governor of Medina sent to Hafsa and demanded it. She refused to give it up so it stayed with her until she died. But Marwan was so concerned to have it that as soon as he returned from her funeral, he immediately sent to get it. The story is recorded by Ibn Abi Dawud (died 316 AH) in his Kitab Al Maşahif. He gives the Isnad down to Salem ben Abdullah who said, “When Hafsa died and we returned from her funeral, Marwan sent with firm intention to Abdullah ben Omar (Hafsa’s brother) whtat he must send him those pages, and Abdullah ben Omar sent them to him, and Marwan ordered it and they were torn up. And he said, I did this becasue whatever was in it was surely written and preserved in the (offical) volume and I was afraid that after a time people will be suspicious of this copy or they will say there is something in it that wasn’t written.”15 With that destruction and the eventual destruction of Ibn Mas’ud’s copy in Kufa, the primary sources were all destroyed with no copies having been made of them. However, for the first two or three centuries of the Hejira, called the period of original thinking (ijihad), Quranic teachers would speak of prefering the reading of one or another of the companions of the prophet. But finally this became so intolerable of orthodoxy, that even such an eminent Quranic authority as the great Baghdad scholar İbn Shanabudh (245-328) was forced to make public recantation of his use of readings from the old Codices.16 15. Ibn Abi Dawud, pp. 24-25, reproduced in Jeffery, Materials for the History of the Text of the Qur’an. 16. Jeffery, Materials for the History of the Text of the Qur’an, p. 9.
34.6 The Collection of the Gospel as Compared to that of the Qur’an All scholars are agreed that many of the New Testament books were written between 52 and 79 AD; that all of them were written by 95 AD; and that all of the New Testament authors believed firmly in the Doctrinal Gospel. I stress these dates of 52-70 AD because they represent a time period of 26-44 years after Jesus first started preaching. When we remember that Othman’s official copies of the Qur’an were sent out, at the earliest, around 26 AH or 40 years after Muhammad started preaching, we see that the time frames for the distribution of the written Gospel and the distribution of the written Qur’an are very similar. Dr. William Campbell, The Qur’an and the Bible, pp. 117. 34.7 The Scribes & Editors for the Qur’an Muhammad’s secretary = Zaid ibn Thabit used Qoraishi dialect Hafsah = Zaid’s Qur’anic text given to her Uthman = Burned 24 variant verisons of the Qur’an
-----
Mateen Elass, Understanding the Koran, pp. 51. In spite of his great effort to prevent the occurance of variant readings in the text of the Qur’an, quite a number may still be found. Al Baidawi mentions some in his commentary on Suras 3:100; 6:91; 19:35; 28:48; 33:6, etc. This last one from the Sura of the Confederates (Al-Ahzab) 33:6 from 5-7 AH is also mentioned by Yusuf Ali: The Othmanic text reads, “The prophet is closer to the believers than their own selves, and his wives are their mothers.” But there are reports that the Ubai b. Ka’b’s text read, The prophet is closer to the believers than their own selves, and he is a father to them, and his wives are their mothers.”1 ----- 1. Yusuf Ali, The Holy Qur’an, Note 3674, p. 1104. Dr. William Campbell, The Qur’an and the Bible, pp. 123-124. 34.9 Early Variants in the Qur’an Abdullah İbn Mas’ud who was the personal servant of Muhammad was present at the battles of both Badr and Uhud and was one of the first to teach Qur’an reading. It is well-known that his collection differed in its order of the Suras, and that it did not include Suras 1, 113, and 114. Another of Muhammad’s companions who made his own collection of Suras was Ubai b. Ka’b. One of the Ansar, he served as Muhammad’s secretary after Muhammad came to Medina. Ubai’s codex was known to contain two Suras not found in the Othmanic text – Surat al-Khal’ and Surat al-Hafad, as well as a verse on men’s greed following Sura 10:24. Before the appearance of Othman’s text, Ubai’s text was much used in Syria; and Ubai may have even helped Zaid prepare the official text for Othman. In addition to these two men, Islamic history and Hadiths mention primary collections made by Ali Ibn Abi Talib, the Prophet’s son-in-law, whose codex was arranged in chronological order starting with Sura 96; by İbn Abbas, whose codex is mentioned by al-Suyuti (Itqan, p. 154) as including two extra Suras of Ubai; and by Abu Musa, whose codex was used by the people of Basra. It contained the two extra Suras of Ubai (Itqan, p. 154) as well as the verse on the greed of men (Muslim, Salih, 1, 285, 286).1 Othman.. sent to every region a volume from what they had copied, and commanded regarding everything of the Qur’an besides it, in every sheet and volume, that it should be burned.2 Further evidence demonstrating the great effort made by Zaid and his committee in compiling their collection is found in the following Hadith, Ibn Shahab said that Kharijah ibn Zaid ibn Thabit told me that he heard Zaid ibn Thabit say, “when we coiped the volume, there was missing from Sura al Ahzab a verse (33:23) which I used to hear the Apostle of God recite. Therefore we sought for it. And we found it with Khuzaimah ibn Thabit the Ansari from among the believers... Therefore we inserted it in its Sura in the volume.”3 1. Much of the information in this section is from Materials For the History of the Text of the Qur’an, Arthur Jeffery, E.J. Brill, Leden, 1937. 2. Tabari’s Commentary, I, 20. 3. Mishkat, p. 185. Bukhari derived this from Anas Malik. Dr. William Campbell, The Qur’an and the Bible, pp. 110. 34.10 Rival Versions of the Qur’an Though in the end Uthman’s strong-arm tactics did lead to the adoption of one text over all rivals, the champions of the other versions did not capitulate quietly. Abdullah Ibn Masud in particular contended that with good reason that his codex was most reliable and authoratative. After all, he ahd been one of Muhammad’s closest companions from the early days of the prophet’s ministry and was singled out by Muhammad for his memorization skills. Tradition records Ibn Masud’s self-assessment as primary among the “qurra’” (the de facto gatekeepers of the revelation of Muhammad). On one story, he speaks with appropriate humility: Shaqiq bin Salama narrates: Once ‘Abdullah bin Mas’ud delivered a sermon before us and said: “By Allah, I learnt over seventy Suras direct from Allah’s Apostle. By Allah, the companions of the Prophet came to know that I am one of those who know Allah’s Book best of all of them, yet I am not the best of them... (al-Bukhari, 6:522) But in another account he challenges anyone to equal his memory regarding Muhammad’s revelations: By Allah other tahn Whom none has the right to be worshipped! There is no Sura revealed in Allah’s Book but I know at what place it was revealed; and there is no Verse revealed in Allah’s Book but I know about whom it was revealed. And if I know there is somebody who knows Allah’s book better than I, and he is at a place that camels can reach, I would go to him. (al-Bukhari 6:524) According to what can be reconstructed from Muslim tradition, there were numerous significant textual differences between the manuscripts of Zaid and Ibn Masud, not to mention the multiplication of variants found in other major versions being championed in their respective parts of the Muslim world. Mateen Elass, Understanding the Koran, pp. 48-49. 34.11 Different Types of Variations found in the Qur’an Muhamamd Hamidullah has quite a detailed discussion of these variations in the preface to his French translation of the Qur’an.2 1. Variations caused by a scribe who makes an error while copying. Naturally these are easy to find by comparing with other copies. 2. Variations caused by someone writing notes of explanation in the margin. Hamidullah writes: “The style of the Qur’an was such that sometimes even the companions of the Prophet had to ask him for explanations. Sometimes they noted these explantaions in the margin of their personal copies in order not to forget them. It is completely understandable that sometimes the scribe mixed the text and commentary while trying to faithfully make a new copy form an old one. We know of the famous order of Omar who formally forbid the adding of commentary to copies of the Qur’an. “There are hundreds of variant readings of this type. But the fact that ‘the Qur’an of such and such a teacher’ has a certain addition which the others don’t have, leaves no doubt as to the origin of that addition. Also the information concerning this type of variant given by the classical authors is sometimes contradictory – some saying that the Qur’an of so and so had a certain addition – others denying it.” 3. Variations caused by the permission originally given by Muhammad to recite the Qur’an in other dialects than that used by the people of Mecca. “Muhammad tried to make religion easy for even the most humble. Therefore, he tolerated some dialectical variations even for the text of the Qur’an because the essential thing was not the word but the sense; not the recitiation, but the application and the assimilation. He said willingly, ‘Gabriel permitted me to have up to seven different readings.’ While guarding for himself and his fellow citizens a certain reading, he permitted the members of different tribes to replace certain words by their equivalents – better known in their tribe. (Later Othman stopped this also.) 4. Variations coming from the fact that for the first 150 to 200 years after the Hejira, the hand written copies of the Qur’an were written without vowel marks, and without dots to distinguish between different letters written in the same way. Hamidullah is one of the few Muslim authors who has been willing to admit, as we saw above, that “there are hundreds of variant readings”. In fact there are thousands. In Arthur Jeffrey’s work where he has listed all the variants which he has found reported in any document, there are more than 1700 attribute to Ibn Mas’ud alone. -----
2. Hamidullah, Le Coran, p. XXXIII, (translation mine of all his notes).
34.12 A Missing Verse: 33:23 Bukhari 6, p. 479.....A verse from Sura Ahzab was missed by me when we copied the Qur’an and I used to hear Allah’s Apostle reciting it. So we searched for it and found it with Khuzaima-bin-Thabit al Ansari. (missing Ahzab 33:23) 34.13 Omissions in the Qur’an The story of Moses’ confrontation with Pharoah occurs 27 times in the Qur’an (once every 4.2 chapters) but the story of the passover is left out in all 27 episodes! Don Richardson, Secrets of the Koran, p. 33 But Muhammad claims 12 times that he was confirming the Christian Gospel and the Jewish Scriptures! (eg. 2:97 & 101) 34.14 The Stoning Verses Missing İbn Ishaq, Sirat Rasulullah.....God sent Muhammad and sent down the Scripture to him. Part of what he sent down was the passage on stoning, we were taught it, and we heeded it. The apostle stoned and we stoned them after him. I fear that in time to come men will say that they find no mention of stoning in God’s book and thereby go astray in neglecting an ordinance which God has sent down. Verily stoning in the book of God is a penalty laid on married men and women who commit adultery. Bukhari 8:816.....We do not find the verses of (stoning to death) in the Holy Book. ...Lo! I confirm that the penalty of RAJAM (stoning) be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse... Allah’s Apostle carried out the penalty of RAJAM, and so did we after him. Josh McDowell & John Gilchrist, The Islam Debate (vs. Ahmed Deedat), Here’s Life Publishers, San Bernadino, CA, 1983. pp.51- 52.
34.15 Statistics on the Qur’an Book = 114 Chapters Verses = 6,616 (ayas) Words = 77,943 (kelime) Letters = 338,606 (harf) Al-Kitab = The Book Al-furkan = the distinction Al-dikhr = the warning = Mother of the Book 34.16 Varying Statistics on the Number of Words in the Qur’an Dr. Osman Keskioğlu = 77,934 Nûzulünden İtibaren Kur’an-ı Kerim, p. 124 isos.org = 78,090 muslimhope.com/quranvariants 34.17 Varying Statistics on the Number of Verses in the Qur’an Don Richardson = 6,151 Secrets of the Koran, p. 22 Ata İbn Yasar = 6,170 muslimhope.com/quranvariants Ubayy İbn Ka’b = 6,210 muslimhope.com/quranvariants Meccans = 6,212 godarticles.com/hadith-by-the -Kamil-Shaikh İsmail’il İbn Ja’far’ = 6,214 godarticles.com/hadith-by-the -Kamil-Shaikh al-Basrah = 6,216 godarticles.com/hadith-by-the -Kamil-Shaikh İbn Mas’ud = 6,218 godarticles.com/hadith-by-the -Kamil-Shaikh Yahya İbn al-Harith = 6,226 muslimhope.com/quranvariants al Dhamari Dr. Rashad Khalifa = 6,234 info@submission.org Dr. Osman Keskioğlu = 6,236* Nûzulünden İtibaren Kur’an-ı Kerim, p. 124 & godarticles. com & al-Kufah hadith-by-the -Kamil-Shaikh İbn Warraq = 6,240 Why I’m Not a Muslim, p. 105 ash-Sham (Syria) = 6,250 godarticles.com/hadith-by-the -Kamil-Shaikh Fickey McDonald = 6,346 helium.com/scientific miracles Gudang Beasiswa = 6,348 scholarships4u.bolgspot. com/2006/09/quran Dr. Sabeel Ahmed = 6,600+ slidesare.net/sabeel/quran Dr. George Braswell = 6,616 What You Need to Know About
Shaykh Khalid Yasin = 6,626 You Tube Dr. Kashif Ahmed Butt = 6,666 pindiplus.com/Amazing Koran & ‘A’ishah & godarticles.com/hadith-by -the-Kamil-Shaikh
The original of 20:3 is without the “nun” but the modern version has added it. 2. The original of 36:20 is missing the “Yaa” and “Nun” which the modern version has added. 3. The original of 36:21 is missing a “Meem” which the modern version has added. 4. The original letter form for “fa” or “qaf” is present in 19:72 whereas this letter has been changed to “nun” in the modern versions. 5. The original of 20:108 is without “seen” which has been added in the modern version. 6. In the original of 7:69 there is a “seen” whereas in the modern verison this has been changed to “sad”. 7. The original of 20:79 has “nun” whereas the modern version has changed this to “yaa” 8. The original of 38:26 is without “yaa” but the modern version has added it. 9. There is an extra letter “yaa” in 2:15 in the modern 1924 Egyptian Arabic edition. 10. The original of 18:83 has the letter “meem” that was replaced by the letters “nun” and “yaa” in the modern version. 11. The pronoun “huwa” (he) is present in the Tashkent-Samarqand original of 2:284 whereas the Modern Arabic version has replaced it with Allah!! 12. In the modern version of 2:57 a word “Alykum” appears which is not in the original but a small portion remains in the margin where it was sought to be added. 13. In the original an “alif” in 5:99 was replaced in the modern Arabic with a “yaa”. 14. In the original of 6:11 the letter “lam” preceeds the “mim” whereas in the modern version the “lam” has been replaced by a “tha”. 15. In the original of 7:27 the letters “meem” and “nun” appear, but these have been removed in the modern Arabic. There are many more examples... http://www.submission.org/quran/protect.html 34.19 Arabic Consontal Letters The writing of the Koran was built on the use of early Arabic’s seventeen consontal letters. However, when diacritical points are added, the number of distinct letters increases to twenty-nine. Mateen Elass, Understanding the Koran, p. 45. There are certain letters in Arabic which are written in exactly the same way except that they have dots over them or under them to show the difference... There are seven other pairs of letters in which two members of the pair are told apart by the number of dots, and one group of three. Or to put the problem simply. There are only 15 letter forms to represent 28 different letters. Dr. William Campbell, The Qur’an and the Bible, pp. 124. 34.20 No Vowels or Diacritical Points In the introduction to his translation, Dawood comments that, because the Quran was originally written in the Kufic script and there was, therefore, no indication of vowels or diacritical points, “Variant readings are recognized by Muslims as of equal authority” and “it ought to be borne in mind that the Quran contains many statements which, if not recognized as altogether obscure, lend themselves to more that one interpretation.” Dr. John Ankerberg, Fast Facts on Islam, p. 51. 34.21 Was the Qur’an Written in Perfect Arabic? 12:2..... 13:37..... 41:41 & 44.....
All Western and Muslim scholars admit the presence of variant readings... According to Prof. Guillame in his book Islam (pp. 191 ff.), some of the original verses of the Quran were lost. For example, one Sura originally had 200 verses in the days of Ayesha. But by the time Uthman standardized the text of the Quran, it had only 73 verses! A total of 127 verses had been lost, and they have never been recovered. The Shiite Muslims claim that Uthman left out 25% of the original verses in the Quran for political reasons... John Burton’s book, The Collection of the Quran, which was published by Cambridge University, documents how such verses were lost. Burton states concerning the Muslim claim that the Quran is perfect: “The Muslim accounts of the history of the Quran texts are a mass of confusion, contradicitons and inconsistencies...” Not only have parts of the Quran been lost, but entire verses and chapters have been added to it. For example, Ubai had several Suras in his manuscript of the Quran which Uthnman omitted from his standardized text. Thus there were Qurans in circulation before Uthman’s text which had additional revelations from Muhammad that Uthman did not find or approve of, and thus he failed to place them in his text... Dr. John Ankerberg, Fast Facts on Islam, p. 46-47. 34.22 The Qur’an is a Clear book!? Iranian Ali Dashti, in Twenty-Three Years: A Study of the Prophetic Career of Muhammad, says: “The Koran contains sentences (in the Arabic original) which are incomplete and unintelligible without... commentaries. Foreign words... and words used with other than normal meaning, (words) inflected without the concord of gender and number, illogically and ungrammatically applied pronouns whcih sometimes have no referent, and predicates which in rhymed passages are often remote from their subjects... more than 100 Koranic aberrations from (Arabic’s) normal rules have been noted.” German Arabic scholar Gerd Puin, states: The Koran claims for itself that it is “mubeen” or “clear.” But if you look at it (in the original Arabic, as Puin does), you will notice that every fifth sentence or so simply doesn’t make sense. Many Muslims – and Orientalists – will tell you otherwise, of course, but the fact is that a fifth of the Koranic text is just incomprehensible. This is what had caused the traditional anxiety regarding translation. If the Koran is not comprehensible – if it can’t even be understood in Arabic – then it’s not translatable. People fear that (fact). And Since the Koran claims repeatedly to be a clear but obviously it is not – as even speakers of Arabic will tell you – there is a contradiciton. Something else is going on. Don Richardson, Secrets of the Koran, p. 65-67. 34.23 Ambigious Pronouns in the Qur’an Muhammad replaces several hundred very-needed nouns with frustratingly ambiguous pronouns. As an example, in Enfal 8:19.....If you were seeking a judgement, now has a judgement come to you. And if you desist, it will be best for you, but if you return We also shall return. And (know) your hosts will avail you naught, however numerous it be, and that Allah is with the believers (in His guidance). Who was he addressing? What was the judgement about? Who should desist from what? Muhammad does not specify answers to any of these questions anywhere, not even in the context of the verse. Don Richardson, Secrets of the Koran, p. 98-99. “The Koran contains many statements which, if not recognized as altogether obscure, lend themselves to more than one interpretation. I have taken pains to reproduce these ambiguities wherever they occur, and have provided explanatory footnotes in order to avoid turning the text (itself) into an interpretation rather than a translation. 34.24 Literary Problems in the Qur’an Ali Dashti in his book Twenty-Three Years: A Study of the Prophetic Career of Muhammad, states about the Qur’an: “The Koran contains sentnces which are incomplete and not fully intelligible without the aid of commentaries; foreign words, unfamiliar Arabic words, and words used with other than the normal meaning; adjectives and verbs inflected without observance of the concords of gender and number; illogically and ungrammatically applied pronouns which sometimes have no referent; and predicates which in rhymed passages are often remote from the subjects. These and other such aberations in the language have given scope to critics who deny the Koran eloquence... To sum up, more than one hundred aberations from the normal rules have been noted.” 34.25 Redundancy in the Qur’an If every statement or story that is repeated in the Koran were given only once, the entire Koran would slim down to 40% of its published length. 60% is redundant. 1.Muhammad says about 100 times quotes God as confirming that “he sent down this book (Koran)” (eg. 16:46, 21:10 etc.) 2. Muhammad retells aspects of Abraham’s story – with Biblical and legendary content intertwined – in 24 of the Korans first 87 chapters = 1 out of every 3.6 chapters. 3. Muhammad references Noah, hero of the biblical flood in 28 of the first 71 chapters = 1 in every 2.5 chapters. 4. Muhammad 28 times in his first 79 chapters describes his God-given mission as limited to one task: to be “a warner only” (11:12, 13:7 etc.) Don Richardson, Secrets of the Koran, p 95-98. 34.26 A Literal Interpretion of the Qur’an According to Khaled Abou El Fadl, an acting professor at UCLA law school, Islamic law considers terrorism (hirabah) a grave and predatory sin punishable by death. It forbids the taking or slaying of hostages as well as stealthy or indiscriminate attacks on enemies... But, he argues that an “ethically oblivious” strand of Islam has developed since the 1970s that dismisses the juristic tradition and the notion of universal and innate moral values. Instead, it relies on a literal interpretation of texts and the technicalities of Islamic law...” theage.com.au/news/state/2001/09/22/FFXC))DVURC.html Dr. John Ankerberg, Fast Facts on Islam, pp. 105-106. 34.27 Blind Faith Required Scientific knowledge directly conflicts with Muslim religious beliefs pn a number of issues. But the fundamental difference is a question of methodology – Islam relies on blind faith and the uncritical acceptance of texts on which the religion is based, whereas science depends on critical thought, observation, deduction, and results that are internally coherent and correspon to reality. We can no longer leave religious thought uncriticized. All the sacred texts must be scrutinized in a scientific manner. Only then will we stop gazing back and only then will religion stop being an obscurantist justification for the intellectual and political starus quo. İbn Warraq, Why I Am Not A Muslim, p. 7. STOP A-27-28 Facts About The Quran 34.28 Is the Qur’an Miraculous? What of the claim that that subject matter is miraculous? Like İbn Kammuna, points out: The Koran contains nothing new in the sense of ideas not already expressed by others. All moral precepts of the Koran are self-evident and generally acknowldeged. The stories in it are taken in identical of slightly modified forms from the lore of the Jews and Christians, whose rabbis and monks Muhammad had met and consulted on his journeys to Syria, and from memories conserved by the descendents of “Ad and Thamud.”... In the field of moral teachings, however, the Koran cannot be considered miraculous. Muhammad reiterated principles which mankind had already conceived in earlier centuries and many places. Confucius, Budda, Zoroaster, Socrates, Moses and Jesus had said similar things... Many of the duties and rites of Islam are continuations of practices which the pagan Arabs had adopted from the Jews.
by A.R. Kidwai Despite the historical fact that the early Muslim community's stand on the translation of the Arabic text of the Quran was ambivalent, as indeed, the general Muslim attitude remains so to this day, the act of translation may be logically viewed as a natural part of the Muslim exegetical effort. However, whereas the idea of interpreting the Quran has not been so controversial, the emotional motives behind rendering the Quranic text into languages other than Arabic have always been looked upon with suspicion. This is obvious as the need for translating the Quran arose in those historic circumstances when a large number of non-Arabic speaking people had embraced Islam, and giving new linguistic orientations to the contents of the revelation - as, for instance, happened in the case of the 'New Testament' - could have led to unforeseeable, and undesirable, developments within the body of the Islamic religion itself. (For a brief, though highly useful, survey of the Muslim attitudes towards the permissibility of translating the text of the revelation to non-Arabic tongues, see M. Ayoub, 'Translating the Meaning of the Quran: Traditional Opinions and Modern Debates', in Afkar Inquiry, Vol. 3, No. 5 (Ramadan 1406/May 1986), pp.34 9). The Muslim need for translating the Quran into English arose mainly out of the desire to combat the missionary effort. Following a long polemical tradition, part of whose goal was also the production of a - usually erroneous and confounding - European version of the Muslim scripture, Christian missionaries started their offensive against a politically humiliated Islam in the eighteenth century by advancing their own translations of the Quran. Obviously, Muslims could not allow the missionary effort - invariably confounding the authenticity of the text with a hostile commentary of its own - to go unopposed and unchecked. Hence, the Muslim decision to present a faithful translation of the Quranic text as well as an authentic summary of its teaching to the European world. Later, the Muslim translations were meant to serve even those Muslims whose only access to the Quranic revelation was through the medium of the European languages. Naturally, English was deemed the most important language for the Muslim purpose, not least because of the existence of the British Empire which after the Ottomans had the largest number of Muslim subjects. The same rationale, however, applies to sectarian movements within Islam or even to renegade groups outside the fold of Islam, such as the Qadiyanis. Their considerable translational activities are motivated by the urge to proclaim their ideological uniqueness. Although there is a spate of volumes on the multi-faceted dimensions of the Quran, no substantial work has so far been done to critically examine the mass of existing English translations of the Quran. Even bibliographical material on this subject was quite scant before the fairly recent appearance of World Bibliography of the Translations of the Meanings of the Holy Quran (Istanbul, OIC Research Centre, 1986), which provides authoritative publication details of the translations of the Quran in sixty-five languages. Some highly useful work in this field had been done earlier by Dr. Hamidullah of Paris. Appended to the Cambridge History of Arabic Literature Volume 1, Arabic Literature to the End of the Umayyad Period (Cambridge university Press, 1983) is a bibliography of the Quran translations into European languages, prepared by J.D. Pearson, as is the latter's article in the Encyclopaedia of Islam. It is, however, of not much use to the Muslim. Since none of the above-mentioned works is annotated, the reader gets no idea about the translator's mental make-up, his dogmatic presuppositions and his approach to the Quran as well as the quality of the translation. Similarly the small chapter entitled 'The Qur'an and Occidental Scholarship' in Bell and Watt's Introduction to the Qur'an (Edinburgh, 1970, pp. 173-86), although useful in providing background information to Orientalists' efforts in Quranic studies, and translations, more or less for the same reasons, is of little value to general Muslim readers. Thus, studies which focus on those aspects of each translation of the Quran are urgently needed lest Western scholars misguide the unsuspecting non-Arabic speaking readers of the Quran. An effort has been made in this survey to bring out the hallmarks and shortcomings of the major complete translations of the Quran. The early English translations of the Quran by Muslims stemmed mainly from the pious enthusiasm on their part to refute the allegations leveled by the Christian missionaries against Islam in general and the Quran in particular. Illustrative of this trend are the following translations: (i) Mohammad Abdul Hakim Khan, The Holy Qur'an:'with short notes based on the Holy Qur'an or the authentic traditions of the Prophet, or and New Testaments or scientific truth. All fictitious romance, questionable history and disputed theories have been carefully avoided' (Patiala, 1905); (ii) Hairat Dehlawi, The Koran Prepared, by various Oriental learned scholars and edited by Mirza Hairat Dehlawi. Intended as 'a complete and exhaustive reply to the manifold criticisms of the Koran by various Christian authors such as Drs. Sale, Rodwell, Palmer and Sir W. Muir' (Delhi, 1912); and (iii) Mirzal Abu'l Fadl, Qur'an, Arabic Text and English Translation Arranged Chronologically with an Abstract (Allahabad, 1912). Since none of these early translations was by a reputed Islamic scholar, both the quality of the translation and level of scholarship are not very high and these works are of mere historical interest. Later works, however, reflect a more mature and scholarly effort. Muhammad Marmaduke William Pickthall, an English man of letters who embraced Islam, holds the distinction of bringing out a first-rate rendering of the Qur'an in English, The Meaning of the Glorious Qur'an (London, 1930). It keeps scrupulously close to the original in elegant, though now somewhat archaic, English. However, although it is one of the most widely used English translations, it provides scant explanatory notes and background information. This obviously restricts its usefulness for an uninitiated reader of the Qur'an. Abdullah Yusuf Ali's The Holy Qur'an: Translation and Commentary (Lahore, 1934 37), perhaps the most popular translation, stands as another major achievement in this field. A civil servant by vocation, Yusuf Ali was not a scholar in the classical Muslim tradition. Small wonder, then, that some of his copious notes, particularly on hell and heaven, angels, jinn and polygamy, etc. are informed with the pseudo-rationalist spirit of his times, as for instance in the works of S. Ahmad and S. Ameer Ali. His overemphasis on things spiritual also distorts the Qur'anic worldview. Against this is the fact that Yusuf Ali doubtless was one of the few Muslims who enjoyed an excellent command over the English language. It is fully reflected in his translation. Though his is more of a paraphrase than a literal translation, yet it faithfully represents the sense of the original. Abdul Majid Daryabadi's The Holy Qur'an: with English Translation and Commentary (Lahore, 1941 - 57) is, however, fully cognate with the traditional Muslim viewpoint. Like PIckthall's earlier attempt, it is a faithful rendering, supplemented with useful notes on historical, geographical and eschatological issues, particularly the illuminating discussions on comparative religion. Though the notes are not always very exhaustive, they help to dispel the doubts in the minds of Westernized readers. However, it too contains inadequate background information about the Suras (chapters of the Quran) and some of his notes need updating.
Since Mawdudi, a great thinker, enjoyed rare mastery over both classical and modern scholarship, his work helps one develop an understanding of the Qur'an as a source of guidance. Apart from setting the verses/Suras in the circumstances of its time, the author constantly relates, though exhaustive notes, the universal message of the Qur'an to his own time and its specific problems. His logical line of argument, generous sensibility, judicious use of classical Muslim scholarship and practical solutions to the problems of the day combine to show Islam as a complete way of life and as the Right Path for the whole of mankind. Since the translation of this invaluable work done by Muhammad Akbar is pitiably poor and uninspiring, the much-needed new English translation of the entire work is in progress under the auspices of the Islamic Foundation, Leicester. The Message of the Quran by Muhammad Asad (Gibraltar, 1980) represents a notable addition to the body of English translations couched in chaste English. This work is nonetheless vitiated by deviation from the viewpoint of the Muslim orthodoxy on many counts. Averse to take some Qur'anic statements literally, Asad denies the occurrence of such events as the throwing of Abraham into the fire, Jesus speaking in the cradle, etc. He also regards Luqman, Khizr and Zulqarnain as 'mythical figures' and holds unorthodox views on the abrogation of verses. These blemishes apart, this highly readable translation contains useful, though sometimes unreliable background information about the Qur'anic Suras and even provides exhaustive notes on various Qur'anic themes. The fairly recent The Qur'an: The First American Version (Vermont, 1985) by another native Muslim speaker of English, T.B. Irving, marks the appearance of the latest major English translation. Apart from the obnoxious title, the work is bereft of textual and explanatory notes. Using his own arbitrary judgment, Irving has assigned themes to each Qur'anic Ruku' (section). Although modern and forceful English has been used, it is not altogether free of instances of mistranslation and loose expressions. With American readers in mind, particularly the youth, Irving has employed many American English idioms, which, in places, are not befitting of the dignity of the Qur'anic diction and style. In addition to the above, there are also a number of other English translations by Muslims, which, however, do not rank as significant ventures in this field. They may be listed as: 1. Al-Hajj Hafiz Ghulam Sarwar, Translation of the Holy Qur'an (Singapore, 1920) 2. Ali Ahmad Khan Jullundri, Translation of the Glorious Holy Qur'an with commentary (Lahore, 1962) 3. Abdur Rahman Tariq and Ziauddin Gilani, The Holy Qur'an Rendered into English (Lahore, 1966) 4. Syed Abdul Latif, Al-Qur'an: Rendered into English (Hyderabad, 1969) 5. Hashim Amir Ali, The Message of the Qur'an Presented in Perspective (Tokyo, 1974) 6. Taqui al-Din al-Hilali and Muhammad Muhsin Khan, Explanatory English Translation of the Holy Qur'an: A Summarized Version of Ibn Kathir Supplemented by At-Tabari with Comments from Sahih al-Bukhari (Chicago, 1977) 7. Muhammad Ahmad Mofassir, The Koran: The First Tafsir in English (London, 1979) 8. Mahmud Y. Zayid, The Qur'an: An English Translation of the Meaning of the Qur'an (checked and revised in collaboration with a committee of Muslim scholars) (Beirut, 1980) 9. S.M. Sarwar, The Holy Qur'an: Arab Text and English Translation (Elmhurst, 1981) 10. Ahmed Ali, Al-Qur'an: A Contemporary Translation (Karachi, 1984). (In view of the blasphemous statements contained in Rashad Khalifa's The Qur'an: The Final Scripture (Authorized English Version) (Tucson, 1978), it has not been included in the translations by Muslims). Even amongst the Muslim translations, some are representative of the strong sectarian biases of their translators. For example, the Shia doctrines are fully reflected in accompanying commentaries of the following books: S.V. Mir Ahmad Ali, The Holy Qur'an with English Translation and Commentary, according to the version of the Holy Ahlul Bait includes 'special notes from Hujjatul Islam Ayatullah Haji Mirza Mahdi Pooya Yazdi on the philosophical aspects of the verses' (Karachi, 1964); M.H. Shakir, Holy Qur'an (New York, 1982); Syed Muhammad Hussain at-Tabatabai, al-Mizan: An Exegesis of the Qur'an, translated from Persian into English by Sayyid Saeed Akhtar Rizvi (Tehran, 198~). So far five volumes of this work have been published. Illustrative of the Barelvi sectarian stance is Holy Qur'an, the English version of Ahmad Raza Khan Brailai's Urdu translation, by Hanif Akhtar Fatmi (Lahore, n.d.). As pointed out earlier, the Qadiyanis, though having abandoned Islam, have been actively engaged in translating the Qur'an, Apart from English, their translations are available in several European and African languages. Muhammad Ali's The Holy Qur'an: English Translation (Lahore, 1917) marks the beginning of this effort. This Qadiyani translator is guilty of misinterpreting several Qur'anic verses, particularly those related to the Promised Messiah, his miracles and the Qur'anic angelology. Similar distortions mar another Qadiyani translation by Sher Ali, The Holy Qur'an: Arabic Text with English Translation (Rabwah, 1955).Published under the auspices of Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmad, second successor of the "Promised Messiah" and head of the Ahmadiyyas, this oft-reprinted work represents the official Qadiyani version of the Qur'an. Unapologizingly, Sher Sher Ali refers to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as the "Promised Messiah" and mistranslates and misinterprets a number of Qur'anic verses. Zafarullah Khan's The Qur'an: Arabic Text and English Translation (London, 1970) ranks as another notable Qadiyani venture in this field. Like other Qadiyanis, Zafarullah too twists the Qur'anic verses to opine that the door of prophethood was not closed with the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him). The obtrusion of similar obnoxious views upon the Qur'anic text is found in the following Qadiyani translations, too: (i) Kamaluddin and Nazir Ahmad, A Running Commentary of the Holy Qur'an (London, 1948) (ii) Salahuddin Peer, The Wonderful Koran (Lahore, 1960) (iii) Malik Ghulam Farid, The Holy Qur'an (Rabwah, 1962) (iv) Khadim Rahman Nuri, The Running Commentary of the Holy Qur'an with under-bracket comments (Shillong, 1964) (v) Firozuddin Ruhi, The Qur'an (Karachi, 1965) Apart from the Qadiyanis, Christian missionaries have been the most active non-Muslim translators of the Qur'an. As already noted, origins of this inglorious tradition may be traced back to the anti-Islamic motives of the missionaries. Small wonder, then that these ventures are far from being a just translation, replete as they are with frequent transpositions, omissions, unaccountable liberties and unpardonable faults. A very crude specimen of the Orientalist-missionary approach to the Qur'an is found in Alexander Ross's The Alcoran of Mahomet translated out of Arabique into French, by the Sieur Du Ryer...And newly Englished, for the satisfaction for all that desire to look into the Turkish vanities (London, 1649). In translating the Qur'an, the intention of Ross, a chaplain of King Charles I, was: 'I thought good to bring it to their colours, that so viewing thine enemies in their full body, thou must the better prepare to encounter...his Alcoran.' In the same rabidly anti-Islamic vein are the two appendices in the work entitled as (a) 'A Needful Caveat or Admonition, for them who desire to know what use may be made of or if there be danger in reading the Alcoran' (pp. 406 20) and 'The Life and Death of Mahomet: the Prophet of the Turks and author of the Alcoran' (pp. 395-405). George Sale, a lawyer brought out his The Koran, commonly called The Al Koran of Mohammed (London, 1734), which has been the most popular English translation. Sale's exhaustive 'Preliminary Discourse', dealing mainly with Sira and the Qur'an, betrays his deep hostility towards Islam and his missionary intent in that he suggests the rules to be observed for 'the conversion of Mohammedans' (q.v.). As to the translation itself, it abounds in numerous instances of omission, distortion and interpolations. Dissatisfied with Sale's work, J.M. Rodwell, Rector of St. Ethelberga, London, produced his translation entitled The Koran (London, 1861). Apart from hurling all sorts of wild and nasty allegations against the Prophet and the Qur'an in the Preface, Rodwell is guilty of having invented the so-called chronological Sura order of the Qur'an. Nor is his translation free from grave mistakes of translation and his own fanciful interpretations in the notes. E.H. Palmer, a Cambridge scholar, was entrusted with the preparation of a new translation of the Qur'an for Max Muller's Sacred Books of the East series. Accordingly, his translation, The Qur'an, appeared in London in 1880. As to the worth of Palmer's translation, reference may be made to A. R. Nykl's article, 'Notes on E.H. Palmer's The Qur'an', published in the Journal of the American Oriental Society, 56 (1936) pp. 77-84 in which no less than 65 instances of omission and mistranslation in Palmer's work have been pointed out. Richard Bell, Reader of Arabic, University of Edinburgh, and an acknowledged Orientalist produced a translation of the Qur'an with special reference to its Sura order, as is evident from the title of his work, The Qur'an translated with a critical rearrangement of the Surahs (Edinburgh, 1937-39). In addition to describing the Prophet as the author of the Qur'an, Bell also believes that the Qur'an in its present form was 'actually written by Muhammad himself' (p. vi). In rearranging the Sura order of the Qur'an, Bell, in fact, makes a thorough mess of the traditional arrangement and tries to point out 'alterations substitutions and derangements in the text. A.J. Arberry, a renowned Orientalist and Professor of Arabic at the Universities of London and Cambridge, has been, so far, the latest non-Muslim translator of the Qur'an. Arberry's The Koran Interpreted (London, 1957) no doubt stands out above the other English renderings by non-Muslims in terms of both its approach and quality. Nonetheless, it is not altogether free from mistakes of omission and mistranslation, such as in Al' Imran 111:43, Nisa' IV: 72, 147 and 157, Ma'ida V: 55 and 71, An'am VI: 20, 105, A'raf VII: 157, 158 and 199, Anfal VIII: 17, 29, 41, 59, Yunus X: 88, Hud XI: 30 and 46 and Yusuf XII: 61. N.J. Dawood is perhaps the only Jew to have translated the Qur'an into English. Available in the Penguin edition, Dawood's translation, The Koran (London, 1956) is perhaps the most widely circulated non-Muslim English translation of the Qur'an. The author's bias against Islam is readily observable in the Introduction. Apart form adopting an unusual Sura order in his translation, Dawood is guilty also of having mistranslated the Qur'an in places such as Bakara II:9 and A'raf VII:31, etc. No doubt, the peculiar circumstances of history which brought the Qur'an into contact with the English language have left their imprint on the non-Muslim as well as the Muslim bid to translate it. The results and achievements of their efforts leave a lot to be desired. Unlike, for instance, major Muslim languages such as Persian, Turkish and Urdu, which have thoroughly exhausted indigenous linguistic and literary resources to meet the scholarly and emotional demands of the task, the prolific resources of the universal medium of English have not been fully employed in the service of the Qur'an. The Muslim Scripture is yet to find a dignified and faithful expression in the English language that matches the majesty and grandeur of the original. The currents of history, however, seem to be in favour of such a development. Even English is acquiring a native Muslim character and it is only a matter of time before we have a worthy translation of the Qur'an in that tongue. Till them, the Muslim student should judiciously make use of Pickthall, A. Yusuf Ali, Asad and Irving, Even Arberry's stylistic qualities must not be ignored. Ultimately, of course, the Muslim should try to discover the original and not allow himself to be lost in a maze of translations and interpretations. (Originally printed in The Muslim World Book Review, Vol. 7, No. 4 Summer 1987) http://www.soundvision.com/Info/quran/english.asp 34.30 Yüklə 7,46 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|